Committee Date: 13/10/2010

CARDIFF COUNTY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE

THE REPORTS OF THE CHIEF STRATEGIC PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT OFFICER

LIST OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE PLANNING COMMITTEE ON 13TH OCTOBER 2010 AT 2.30PM

AREA PAGES

WEST / OUTER 1 - 65

EAST / HOUSEHOLDER 66 - 120

INNER 121 - 161

4t October 2010

20871513

TO: Members of the Council

Dear Councillor

Planning Committee Wednesday 13th October 2010 at Ferrier Hall, City Hall, Cardiff (meeting starts at 2.30.p.m.)

I attach a copy of the schedule of Development Control Applications which will be considered at this meeting of the Planning Committee.

The plans relating to the applications will be available for inspection at the City Hall, during the whole of Tuesday and Wednesday morning preceding the Committee.

Unless otherwise stated in the report, Planning Committee has delegated powers to determine the applications in the schedule. Planning Committee (but not an individual member) can also refer a matter to another committee or to the Council for a resolution. However, Council cannot move an amendment to a recommendation relating to a planning application or make a recommendation relating to a planning application and can only refer a matter back to Planning Committee on one occasion, after which Planning Committee shall decide the matter.

Please now note that if any requests for site visits are acceded to by the meeting, such site visits will take place during the afternoon of Monday 8th November 2010 . If you submit a request for a site visit, you must include in your submission -

(a) a choice of at least two starting times for the site visit that you are requesting, each of which must be at least 45 minutes apart; and (b) the reasons why you believe that such a site visit is necessary.

If you fail to provide any choices of starting times for the site visit that you've requested, it will be assumed that you will be available to attend such a site visit at any time of the day, regardless of what time it starts.

The Clerk to the Council will circulate the Agenda for the meeting to the Members of the Planning Committee separately.

Yours sincerely,

Chief Strategic Planning and Environment Officer

CARDIFF LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

When regard is to be had to the Development Plan the Council’s decision must be made in accordance with the Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

The Development Plan for the administrative area of Cardiff remains the City of Cardiff Local Plan (1996), the South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Replacement Structure Plan (1997) and the South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Minerals Local Plan together with the approved Mid Glamorgan County structure Plan incorporating Proposed Alterations No.1 (September 1989).

In accordance with statutory procedures, the Council prepared and placed on deposit a Unitary Development Plan (to 2016) in October 2003. It has never been formally abandoned but agreement was reached with the Welsh Assembly Government in May 2005 to cease work on the UDP and commence work on a new Local Development Plan prepared under the provisions of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

On the 28 April 2009 Cardiff Council placed the Cardiff Local Development Plan 2006- 2021 on deposit for public consultation. From that date, and in accordance with the Council’s resolution, it was taken into account in development control decisions. On the 30th November 2009, following consideration of the responses to consultation, the submission draft was submitted to the Welsh Assembly Government for examination.

However, in the light of the significant reservations expressed at an Exploratory Meeting by the Inspectors appointed to carry out the examination and their recommendation that the Local Development Plan be with drawn from the examination, the Council duly withdrew the LDP on the 12 April 2010.

Unless a draft policy or proposal is a material consideration it should not be taken into account when making decisions: it is strictly irrelevant and if it is given weight in reaching a decision, that decision may be successfully quashed in the High Court.

In the general run of cases the withdrawn Local Development Plan will not be a material consideration. If there is an issue in relation to which the withdrawn LDP is relevant, officers will advise the Committee specifically. Otherwise it should not be taken into account.

Since the deposited UDP has not been abandoned, its policies and proposals may be a material consideration in a given case, but the weight which can be attached to the UDP, and any statement of policy including the statutory Development Plan should be determined in the light of the following principal considerations:-

• The degree to which later statements of national policy and the Wales Spatial Plan make the policy out of date and suggest a decision should be taken otherwise than in accordance with it; • The degree to which the policy is out of date for any other reason; • The level and nature of any objection to a UDP or other draft policy.

Table 1.1: Existing Development Plans covering the Cardiff County Area

Cardiff County Area Cardiff Deposit Unitary Development The Plan was placed on deposit in Plan (to 2016) October 2003 and agreement was reached with Welsh Assembly Government in May 2005 to cease work on the plan and commence work on a new Local Development Plan.

City of Cardiff Area (part of the County of South Glamorgan until April 1996) South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Adopted April 1997 Replacement Structure plan 1991- 2011

City of Cardiff Local Plan (including Adopted January 1996 Waste Policies)

South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Adopted June 1997 Minerals Local Plan Pentyrch Community Area (part of the County of Mid Glamorgan and Borough of Taff Ely until April 1996) Mid Glamorgan County Structure Plan Approved September 1989 incorporating Proposed Alterations No. 1 Mid Glamorgan Replacement Structure Modifications to the Plan including Plan recommendations of the EIP Panel approved by Mid Glamorgan County Council in January 1996 but not adopted in respect of the Pentyrch Community Area.

Glamorgan County Development Plan Approved March 1963 (Area No. 2)

Mid Glamorgan Minerals Local Plan for In June 1996 Cardiff County Council Limestone Quarrying resolved to approve the Plan as modified by the Inspector’s Report, for development control and other planning purposes, but the Plan was not adopted in respect of the Pentyrch Community Area.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 13TH OCTOBER, 2010 Page App No. Location Description Decision Officer No. 1 10/543W Land between 6 and 8 Radyr Road, DEMOLITION OF HALL AND CONSTRUCTION OF SIX FLATS PER MM Llandaff North 16 10/1203/DCO 215 ALBANY ROAD, ROATH CONVERSION FROM 2 TO 4 FLATS WITH REAR EXTENSION REAR PER MR DORMER AND DETACHED GARAGE 26 10/1317/DCO 15 MILL CLOSE, LLANISHEN, CONVERSION OF DWELLING HOUSE INTO 2 NO. SELF CONTAINED PER TW CARDIFF, CF14 0XQ FLATS WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING AND RETENTION OF EXISTING PORCH EXTENSIONS 34 10/1357/DCO 5 HEATH PARK LANE, CARDIFF, CREATION OF NEW DWELLING ALONGSIDE EXISTING BUILDING. PER JH CF14 4AL 46 10/1423/DCO CHILDRENS HOSPITAL, CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOR WALES PHASE 2 106 MR UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF WALES, KING GEORGE V DRIVE EAST, HEATH 59 10/1541/DCO THE MEMORIAL HALL, HIGH CHANGE OF USE FROM D2 (LEISURE TO D1 (NON RESIDENTIAL 106 TW STREET, LLANDAFF, CARDIFF, INSTITUTION) FOR FUTURE USE AS MULTI PURPOSE HALL FOR CF5 2DX USE BY CATHEDRAL SCHOOL AND FOR COMMUNITY USE OUTSIDE SCHOOL HOURS AND EVENTS

PLANNING COMMITTEE 13TH OCTOBER, 2010 Page No. App No. Location Description Decision Officer 66 10/00921/E CARPENTERS DEMOLITION OF EXISTING PUBLIC HOUSE & DEF ODJ ARMS, 751 CONSTRUCTION OF NEW SINGLE STOREY NEWPORT ROAD, BUILDING SHELL FOR FITTING-OUT AS A1 USE LLANRUMNEY, CLASS CONVENIENCE STORE, COMPLETE WITH CARDIFF, CF3 4AJ SERVICING & CAR PARK. 92 10/01044/E 32 TAUNTON ROOF EXTENSION FROM HIP TO GABLE REAR STV MCH CRESCENT, DORMER SINGLE STOREY FRONT SIDE AND LLANRUMNEY, REAR EXTENSION CARDIFF, CF3 4EP 103 10/01405/DCH 3 KESWICK AVENUE, RETENTION OF REAR DORMER EXTENSION PERU ODJ ROATH PARK, CARDIFF, CF23 5PU 115 10/01521/DCH 203 PANTBACH PORCH AND DORMER EXTENSIONS TO SIDES PER PWK ROAD, RHIWBINA, WITH TWO STOREY EXTENSION AT REAR TO CARDIFF, CF14 6AE CREATE DORMER BUNGALOW

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 13 OCTOBER 2010 Page No. App No. Location Description Decision Officer 121 10/01186/DCI 151 CRWYS ROAD, VARIATION OF CONDITION 3 OF PLANNING PERMISSION REF OAG CATHAYS, CARDIFF, 07/1571C TO EXTEND THE OPENING HOURS OF THE CF24 4XT PREMISES FROM 08:00 - 23:00 TO 08:00 - MIDNIGHT EVERYDAY, REMOVAL OF CONDITION 7 AND VARIATION OF CONDITION 6 OF PERMISSION 07/1571/C TO ALLOW THE SALE OF HOT FOOD FOR CONSUMPTION OFF THE PREMISES, AND VARIATION OF CONDITION 6 OF PERMISSION 07/1571/C TO ALLOW RETENTION OF THE USE OF THE PREMISES AS A RESTAURANT

129 10/01276/DCI GROSVENOR HOUSE, ERECTION OF TIMBER FENCING TO CREATE SMOKING PER OAG GREYFRIARS ROAD, TERRACE ON ROOF CITY CENTRE, CARDIFF, CF10 3AD 140 10/01398/DCI LAND ADJACENT TO 17 CONSTRUCTION OF TWO 1 BED SELF CONTAINED FLATS PER RJC DEEMUIR ROAD, TREMORFA 149 10/01461/DCI WAREHOUSE, CHANGE OF USE FROM PHARMACY WHOLESALE REF OAS ALLENSBANK WAREHOUSE TO GYM CLUB CRESCENT, HEATH, CARDIFF, CF14 3PR

PETITION AND AM, MP CONCERN

COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/543/W APPLICATION DATE: 30/03/2010

ED: LLANDAFF NORTH

APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission

APPLICANT: Cadwyn Housing Association LOCATION: LAND BETWEEN 6 AND 8, RADYR ROAD, LLANDAFF NORTH PROPOSAL: DEMOLITION OF HALL AND CONSTRUCTION OF 6NO. NEW FLATS ______

RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. C01 Statutory Time Limit

2. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered 17820-120, 17820-121, 17820-122 attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: for the avoidance of doubt as to the plans hereby approved.

3. The first, second and third floor windows on the side elevation facing no.8 Radyr Road shall be non opening below a height of 1.8 metres above internal floor level and glazed with obscure glass and thereafter be so maintained. Reason: to ensure that the privacy of adjoining occupiers is protected

4. Other than those shown on the submitted plans, no further windows or other opening shall be inserted in the side elevations facing number 6 and 8 Radyr Road. Reason: to ensure that the privacy of adjoining occupiers is protected

5. No development shall take place until ground permeability tests have been undertaken to ascertain whether sustainable drainage techniques can be utilised and a drainage scheme for the disposal of both surface water and foul sewage has been submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. Reason to ensure that the use of sustainable drainage techniques is properly evaluated in the interests of sustainable development.

6. E3D Retain Parking Within Site

7. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until a scheme detailing the measures necessary for the purposes of identifying

1 chemical and other contaminants on the site and to ensure that the land is suitable for the proposed development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any such scheme shall include details of any measures necessary to protect future occupiers/users of the land from chemical and other contaminants. All measures in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with a timetable which shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced

8. Any soils (topsoil or subsoil, natural or manufactured) or similar material to be imported shall be assessed for chemical or other potential contaminants in accordance with a scheme of investigation to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in advance of its importation. Only material approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be imported. All measures specified in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with the relevant Code of Practice and Guidance Notes. Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.

9. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until a scheme detailing the measures necessary for the purposes of identifying chemical and other contaminants on the site and to ensure that the land is suitable for the proposed development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any such scheme shall include details of any measures necessary to protect future occupiers/users of the land from chemical and other contaminants. All measures in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with a timetable which shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.

10. Any aggregate (other than virgin quarry stone) or recycled aggregate material to be imported shall be assessed for chemical or other potential contaminants in accordance with a scheme of investigation to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in advance of its importation. Only material approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be imported. All measures specified in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with the relevant Code of Practice and Guidance Notes. Subject to approval of the above, verification sampling of the material received at the development site is required to verify that the imported aggregate is free from contamination and shall be undertaken in accordance with a scheme agreed with in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.

11. E1B Samples of Materials

12. C7S Details of Refuse Storage

2 13. F4A Landscaping Scheme

14. C4G Landscaping Prior to Occupation

15. C5A Construction of Site Enclosure

16. Notwithstanding the submitted plans, prior to commencement of development details of the improvement works to the existing lane and programme for their implementation to be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme to include, but not be limited to alterations to the existing access onto Radyr Road, widening of the lane within land owned by the developer to a minimum of 4.5 metres for a length of 5m from the edge of the carriage way in Radyr Road, improvements to the visibility splays, associated footway/carriageway works (surfacing, kerbs, edging, drainage and lighting). The agreed scheme is to be implemented to the satisfaction of the local planning authority prior to first occupation of the development. Reason: To ensure that access and egress to the development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic passing along the highway

17. C3S Cycle Parking

18. Each new dwelling hereby permitted shall be constructed to achieve a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 and achieve a minimum of 6 credits under category “Ene 1 – Dwelling Emission Rate” in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide (May, 2009). The development shall be carried out entirely in accordance with the approved assessment and certification. Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards

19. Construction of any dwelling hereby permitted shall not begin until an “Interim Certificate” has been submitted to the local planning authority, certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 and a minimum of 6 credits under “Ene 1 – Dwelling Emission Rate” has been achieved for that individual dwelling or house type in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide (May, 2009). Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.

20. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, a Code for Sustainable Homes “Final Certificate” shall be submitted to the local planning authority certifying that a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 and a minimum of 6 credits under “Ene 1 – Dwelling Emission Rate” has been achieved for the development in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide (May, 2009). Reason: To ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with national planning sustainable building standards.

. RECOMMENDATION 2: A footway crossover is rendered redundant as part of the proposals and shall be extinguished; contact John Haines (tel: 02920 785241) of Highways Operations;

RECOMMENDATION 3: Bulk containers must be provided by the developer/other appropriate agent, to the Councils’ specification and if required can be purchased directly from the Council. Please contact the Waste Management’s commercial department for further information on 02920 717504. You are referred to the Waste Collection and Storage Facilities Supplementary Planning Guidance for further relevant information.

RECOMMENDATION 4: The contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for

(i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and; (ii) safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.

Proposals for areas of possible land instability should take due account of the physical and chemical constraints and may include action on land reclamation or other remedial action to enable beneficial use of unstable land.

The local planning authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination.

1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 Full planning permission is sought for a three-storey block of 6 no. flats, utilising the roof space, along with associated development comprising 6 off street vehicle parking spaces, 6 no. covered cycle parking spaces and incidental open space and boundary walls.

1.2 The proposal has been amended in the course of its consideration, the principle changes being a reduction in height, frontage realignment to continue the form of the neighbouring terrace, a reduction in the foot print and a change of exterior finish to coloured render beneath a slate finish roof.

1.3 The accommodation provided would comprise 4no. two bedroomed flats and 2no. 1 bedroomed flats.

1.4 Consideration of the application was deferred by Committee on the 11th August to enable members to conduct a visit to the site on the 6th September 2010. It was next presented to the Committee on the 15th September when the matter was deferred to enable officers to draft reasons for refusal based on the bulk of the rear and side elevation and the restricted

4 visibility for vehicles emerging from the off street parking area to the rear of the proposed building.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 It is irregular in form enclosing approximately 475 square metres at the end of a terrace of 30 no. small two storey Edwardian houses. It is presently occupied by a small building with a foot print of approximately 110 square metres that is understood to be last used for public worship and assembly.

2.2 It has a 12 metre frontage on Radyr Road and is bounded by rear service lanes on the north and east, these being 21 metres and 28 metres in length respectively. Its western boundary is made with the dwelling house at no 8 Radyr Road and is 27 metres in length. The road boundaries are enclosed by a 1.8 metre high plain galvanised palisade fence whilst there is a mixture of enclosure methods on the boundary with No. 8 Radyr Road.

2.3 The land is down to tarmacadam with a small area of ornamental planting fronting on to Radyr Road. The land is level within the site.

2.4 The surrounding area is in residential use and characterised by a preponderance of small Edwardian terraced houses.

2.5 It should be noted that the entrance to Hayley Park lies 130 metres south west of the site, at the end of Radyr Road.

3. SITE HISTORY

3.1 There is no recent planning history related to the site

4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 The site is on land allocated as existing housing on the Local Plan Proposals Map.

4.2 The following Local Plan Policies are of relevance to the determination of this application:

Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) Policy 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities)

4.3 The following Policies from the deposit Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) are also of relevance:

Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) Policy 2.45 (Trees Woodlands and Hedgerows) Policy 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements)

4.4 Supplementary Planning Guidance:

Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements (2010). Waste collection and Storage Facilities (March 2007)

5. INTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES

The Operational Manager, Transportation comments that access to the site is via a narrow lane and as the proposal is to remove the existing access and increase traffic movements to the rear lane he recommends that the lane off Radyr Road be widened within land owned by the developer. Ideally to 4.5 metres in width for its entire length but if this cannot be accommodated for a minimum length of 5.0 metres measured from the edge of carriageway. On this basis he has no objection subject to conditions which retain car parking, agree details of cycle parking, lane improvement and construction management.

5.1 The Chief Highways and Waste Management Officer (Drainage Operations) has no objection to the proposal and recommends a condition to establish whether sustainable drainage techniques can be employed on the site.

5.2 The Operational Manager, Waste Management notes the provision of the bin storage area however advises that the agent be made aware of the bin storage sizes required. He also advises that collection operatives are not permitted to push/pull bulky containers more than 15 metres to the collection point. He refers the agent to the relevant Supplementary Planning Guidance for further information.

5.3 The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) advises conditions regarding contaminated land as well as imported soil and aggregates and a contamination and unstable land advisory note.

6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES

6.1 Welsh Water recommends conditions relating to drainage.

6.2 Crime Reduction Design Advisor South Wales Police has no objection to the proposal.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 Local Members have been consulted

7.2 Jonathan Morgan AM raised concern regarding the initial proposal considering it to be out of keeping with the street as it would dominate the adjoining traditional homes. He believes the city has a duty to develop residential areas in keeping with existing housing. In respect of the amended proposal his constituents remain concerned that, whilst there have been some minor visual changes, the building has too high a capacity and it will remain out of character with the surrounding buildings. He requests that a site visit be undertaken by the Committee.

7.3 The parliamentary candidate Julie Morgan believes the proposal would be intrusive upon existing residents, front and rear, it does not suit the character of the area, it would compound parking problems and there may be a loss of privacy.

7.3 The proposal was advertised by site notice and neighbour notification letter and re-consultation has taken place in respect of the amended plans.

7.4 Jonathan Evans MP conveys his constituent’s concern that the development is out of keeping with the style of other properties, it remains a three story development despite its reduction in height. He is concerned that there has been a shortened period of re-consultation and he has not been re-consulted directly.

7.5 Councillors Ann Rowland-James and Jacqui Hooper raise concern on behalf of local residents that the proposal joins with No. 8 Radyr Road, it is unsympathetic to the street and overpowering in design, there would be parking issues and consultation letters were slow to arrive. They have consistently objected to the proposal in terms of its impact on the character of the area, its inappropriate scale and its impact on the amenity of adjoining residents. They request a site visit to enable the committee assess these impacts on site.

7.5 A petition objecting to the proposal on the grounds that it is an overdevelopment, it is not in keeping with other properties, car parking issues and loss of privacy has been submitted. This carries 152 signatures; all but three are residents in the locality. A second petition objecting on the grounds that the building is too high, it is too dense a development for the site and it is not in keeping with the locality has been submitted. This carries 24 signatures of residents in the locality. A third petition objecting on the grounds that the proposal is an excessive overdevelopment of a small site, the building will not be in-keeping with the existing houses it sits between, there will be a loss of privacy and natural light in adjoining property and the parking provision is in adequate, has been submitted. This carries 147 signatures of residents in the locality.

7.6 48 letters of representation have been received which object to the proposal. The objections can be summarised as follows:

it is higher than the adjoining houses; it is out of keeping with the character and design of the area; loss of views; loss of light; loss of privacy through overlooking directly and as a result of the height; it is a cramped over-development at too high a density; it would exacerbate existing parking problems in the area and restrict emergency vehicle access; increased traffic flow on rear lanes would be hazardous to pedestrians and children using the lanes;

7 increased traffic flow on rear lanes would create further disturbance to adjoining residents by virtue of noise and lighting; increased traffic flow would be hazardous on an already busy road that provides access to Hailey Park and a rugby club; the water supply and drainage infrastructure would experience problems if the development were to proceed; Llandaff North is heavily populated by housing association residents; it would exacerbate anti social behaviour; the bin store is too small; it would result in the depreciation in property value; noise and dust disturbance during the construction would result; there is a lack of amenity space to serve the development. the owner of 8 Radyr Road will not allow the proposal to connect to it as the plans show.

In relation to the amended proposal it is noted that none of the initial objections have been withdrawn and in addition the following objections have been made

The addition of electronic gates to the car park could have tragic consequences as evidenced by two recent deaths in the UK. A third floor will not fit in a building with the same height as the existing terrace. Six velux windows in the roof plane will feel oppressive and overlooking.

The flats will be occupied by residents with drink, drug or gambling problems to the detriment of the local community. Maintenance of the building as a consequence will be neglected and there will be resultant littering of broken glass and needles posing a risk to children using the lanes.

The development is not welcome and the Cadwyn Housing Association is invited to build elsewhere.

Little use is made of the existing building so the proposal would represent a real increase in traffic generation.

8. ANALYSIS

8.1 The principle considerations for this proposal are its impact on highway safety, the amenity of adjoining residents, the amenity of the occupiers and the character of the area. Taking these in turn, in highway safety terms the six parking spaces proposed satisfy the Council’s parking guidelines. The notional traffic flows generated by the proposal will be smaller than those of the current use. 6No. flats would generate 1No. trip in the AM peak and 1No. trip in the PM peak and 12No. 2 way trips in a typical day. The current use would generate 2No. trips in the AM peak and 3No. in the PM the trips in a typical day would be 24No. 2 way. It is not considered that this traffic generation would be significant when taken against the total movements in the street of some 46 houses with a rugby club and a park access. In any event the proposed generation would be less 50% than the notional

8 generation of the existing use so objection cannot be sustained on these grounds.

8.2 Specific concerns have been raised in representations that the increased traffic flows will present a threat to pedestrians and children using the rear lanes. Whilst the number of movements in the lanes will increase to access the proposed parking, it is not considered that the 12 two way movements will significantly increase the risk to highway user. Whilst the Transportation Manager would like to see the lane widened to 4.5 metres through its length he has indicated that 4.5 metres for a length of 5 metres at the access point will be acceptable in highway safety. This will enable two vehicles to pass each other without conflict at the entrance point. The provision can be secured through the recommended condition. It is not considered that objection can be sustained on these grounds and it is noted that the transportation manager raises no objection to the proposal on this basis.

8.3 The impact on the privacy of adjoining dwellings is of much concern to those making representations but it should be noted that the window separation distances on the front and rear are no different to those that already exist in the street or they exceed the Council’s privacy guidelines, 10.5 metre to garden boundary and 21metre between habitable rooms. The first and second storey windows overlooking No.8 are secondary but are recommended to be subjected of a condition to secure them as obscurely glazed. Those on the third storey overlooking No. 8 are in a position that will not allow any significant overlooking of the ground floor. There are none in the elevation overlooking No.6. Objections on these grounds are not therefore supported.

8.4 The impact on the amenity of adjoining dwellings is also of concern to those making representation. Examination of the building form reveals that it generally replicates that of the existing neighbours by setting the rear annex off the boundary by 1.3 metres albeit that the length of the annex section would be approximately 2.5 meters longer than the existing two storey rear annex at No. 8 Radyr Road. This form is not significantly different to the relationship that already exists in the terrace. On balance the building is not considered to be overbearing or overshadowing to a degree that warrants refusal. Impacts such as noise, smell, light or other emission have been considered and it is felt that they are unlikely any greater than those generated by the existing use. The proposal is unlikely to have an adverse impact on the general amenity of neighbours.

8.5 The amenity of any future residents is reasonably catered for by the inclusion of small areas of rear amenity space and officers are mindful that the site is only a short walk from an extensive area of parkland. There is sufficient light space air and outlook to enjoy a reasonable level of amenity.

8.6 The general scale, character and density of the proposal has generated much of the objection raised in representation. Officers have negotiated amendment of the proposal to provide for the building to respect the height and general frontage alignment of the existing terrace as well as the use of traditional

9 finishes to be sympathetic to it. Whist the proposal is not a replica of the adjoining terrace it is sufficiently close to the character of the terrace in its scale, form fenestration and finish as to cause no harm to the character of the street. The objections on this ground are not supported.

8.7 Tuning to the representations:

It is higher than the adjoining houses - The amended proposal is not. It is out of keeping with the character and design of the area – officers do not share this opinion see 8.6 above. Loss of views – the planning system cannot protect a view. Loss of light – the proposal will primarily impact on the rear ground floor windows of No. 8 Radyr Road in this regard. Being mindful of the general form and relationship of the dwellings in the area it is not considered that the proposal will have an unreasonable effect of the light received by adjoining properties. Loss of privacy through overlooking directly and as a result of the height - officers do not share this opinion see 8.3 above. It is a cramped over-development at too high a density -officers do not share this opinion, there is adequate space to provide a reasonable degree of amenity to occupant and to enable the adequate function of the facilities provided. It would exacerbate existing parking problems in the area and restrict emergency vehicle access - officers do not share this opinion see 8.1 above Increased traffic flow on rear lanes would be hazardous to pedestrians and children using them- officers do not share this opinion see 8.2 above. Increased traffic flow on rear lanes would create further disturbance to adjoining residents by virtue of noise and lighting - officers do not share this opinion see 8.4 above. Increased traffic flow would be hazardous on an already busy road that provides access to Hailey Park and a rugby club - officers do not share this opinion see 8.1 above/ The water supply and drainage infrastructure would experience problems if the development were to proceed – No objection has been raised by the statutory undertakers for their supply. Llandaff North is heavily populated by housing association residents – no evidence has come forward to suggest that any land use planning harm result or that this is in fact the case. It would exacerbate anti social behaviour – no evidence has come forward to suggest that any land use planning harm result or that this is in fact the case. The bin store is too small – this has been addressed by a recommended condition. It would result in the depreciation in property value – the planning system cannot take account if this concern. Noise and dust disturbance during the construction would result – Any unreasonable nuisance arising can be dealt with via the environmental protection act. There is a lack of amenity space to serve the development - officers do not share this opinion see 8.5 above

10 The owner of 8 Radyr Road will not allow the proposal to connect to it as the plans show – noted but this is a private matter to be resolved between the parties involved. The addition of electronic gates to the car park could have tragic consequences as evidenced by two recent deaths in the UK – noted but it is not considered to be a significant risk to the public interest. A third floor will not fit in a building with the same height as the existing terrace – The opinion is noted Six velux windows in the roof plane will feel oppressive and overlooking – the opinion is noted but not shared by officers. There has been a lack of consultation in respect of the application – the Councils usual consultation procedure has been followed. The vendors seek maximum value ultimately this is a function of the number of units approved on the site – the planning authority should only consider the functional and land use planning aspects of the proposal. Jonathan Evans MP concern that there is a shorten period of re-consultation and he has not been re-consulted directly having made representation – the Council’s usual period and practice has been followed.

The flats will be occupied by residents with drink, drug or gambling problems to the detriment of the local community. Maintenance of the building will as a consequence be neglected and there will be resultant littering of broken glass and needles posing a risk to children using the lanes - The application is made to erect six new flats. The design and access statement submitted advises that the prospective purchaser is a social landlord whom intends to manage the development as part of its social housing stock. There is no suggestion in the submission that it is intended to serve a special needs group.

The development is not welcome and the Cadwyn Housing Association is invited to build elsewhere – the planning authority is charged to consider the submitted proposal, not to suggest alternatives.

Little use is made of the existing building so the proposal would represent a real increase in traffic generation – In planning terms the current lawful use can operate at any intensity and account has to be taken of its capacity to generate traffic. The notional traffic generation is derived form an industry standard data base that is recognised as an authoritative source.

8.8 It is considered that the amended proposals are acceptable in respect of siting, design, access, parking, and residential amenity and privacy considerations. The grant of planning permission is recommended, subject to recommended conditions.

8.9 If members are minded to refused the application on the grounds stated at paragraph 1.4 above the following reasons are offered:

(1) The proposal by virtue of the size and bulk of its rear would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area and

11 would appear as overbearing and dominant feature to residents enjoying the use of their rear gardens. (2) In order for vehicles to access the proposed car park entrance to the rear of the site they would have to travel along the existing rear lane, which has boundary walls of 1.8 metres in height on the development side and 1.6 to 1.7 metres on its opposite side. As such visibility for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians would be impeded and would therefore prejudice highway safety (3) Before reaching a decision on these reasons members are asked to consider by the further comment of the Transportation Manager who is concerned that although the walls exceed 1.0 metre in height the nature of the rear lane is such that vehicles will be travelling at very low speeds and would be paying due care and attention when entering and leaving the car park. Similarly cyclists and pedestrians would be aware of the surroundings. In addition, the height of the walls is likely to replicate similar rear lane situations throughout Cardiff and is therefore not an unusual occurrence.

12 13 14 15 LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION

COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/1203/DCO APPLICATION DATE: 27/07/2010

ED: PENYLAN

APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission

APPLICANT: Mr Raja LOCATION: 215 ALBANY ROAD, ROATH PROPOSAL: CONVERSION FROM 2 TO 4 FLATS WITH REAR EXTENSION REAR DORMER AND DETACHED GARAGE ______

RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. C01 Statutory Time Limit

2. No development shall take place until a scheme for the drainage of the site and any connection to the existing drainage system has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Prior to the submission of the drainage details, ground permeability tests shall be undertaken to ascertain whether sustainable drainage techniques can be utilised and the results of the tests shall be incorporated in the submitted scheme. No part of the development shall be occupied until the scheme is carried out and completed as approved. Reason: To ensure an orderly form of development.

3. C3S Cycle Parking

4. C3X Garage to be retained for parking

5. C3T Garage door not to open over highway

6. C5A Construction of Site Enclosure

7. The refuse store indicated on the approved plans shall be provided prior to the beneficial occupation of the flats hereby approved and thereafter shall be retained for such use. Reason: To protect the amenities of the area.

8. The flats hereby approved shall be one and two bedrooms (as detailed within the application and shown on the approved plan). No rooms shall be used or created to provide additional bedrooms. Reason: To protect the residential amenity of future occupiers and the surrounding area.

16 9. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered AAA1/13/a attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application.

RECOMMENDATION 2: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity attention is drawn to the provisions of Section 60 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in relation to the control of noise from demolition and construction activities. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations.

RECOMMENDATION 3: The contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for

(i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and; (ii) safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.

The local planning authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination.

1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 This planning application relates to an end of terrace property at 215 Albany Road, Penylan, where planning permission is sought to increase the number of flats from two to four. The proposals also involve the construction of a single storey extension at the rear of the building, adjoining the boundary with the attached property at 217 Albany Road, together with a flat roofed dormer extension.

1.2 At the rear of the site, it is proposed to construct a pitched roof garage across the width of the plot, next to the rear lane which adjoins the site.

1.3 Details of the siting and appearance of the extensions and garage are shown on the attached plans.

1.4 The submitted layout plan shows a bin storage area and provision of a cycle

17 parking area to the side of the property.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 The application comprises a large end of terrace property sited within a residential area. It is similar to the other properties along this section of Albany Road in that it benefits from a two storey rear annexe.

2.2 Many of the properties in the vicinity have been converted into flats, including 217 Albany Road, which adjoins the application site.

2.3 The boundaries with 213 and 217 Albany Road comprise stone walls approximately 1.7 metres in height, with some overgrown shrubbery

2.4 The rear site boundary backs onto a lane and is enclosed with a high roller shutter door. The lane is under a gating order and is therefore gated at either end to prevent access other than by residents.

3. SITE HISTORY

3.1 10/196E : Lawful Development Certificate for Use as two flats, granted March, 2010.

4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality), Policy 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities) and Policy 28 (Subdivision of Residential Property) of the City of Cardiff Local Plan (January 1996).

4.2 Policies 2.20 (Good Design), 2.22 (Subdivision of Residential Properties), 2.24 (Residential Amenity) and 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements) of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003).

4.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance : Householder Design Guide.

5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

5.1 The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) requests informatives R1 Construction Site Noise and R4 Contamination and Unstable Land Advisory Notice.

5.2 The Operational Manager Waste Management advises that plans detailing refuse storage are acceptable and states that waste must be stored on the highway.

5.3 The Operational Manager, Transportation has raised no objections to the application subject to conditions C3S (Cycle Parking) and C3X (Garage to be retained for parking).

18 5.4 The Chief Highways and Waste Management Officer (Drainage) has no objection to the approval of the planning application but requests that an appropriate drainage condition be attached to any consent that may be issued.

6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

6.1 Welsh Water/Dwr Cymru requests drainage conditions to ensure no detriment to the environment and the Company’s assets.

6.2 The Environment Agency has been consulted on the application. No representations have been received.

REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 Councillors B Kelloway and F Salway advise that they have been contacted by a number of residents living near to the application site who have expressed their objections to the application. Having examined the application details and visited the site, they would like to object to the rear dormer element of the application for the following reasons:

1. The application site is set in a street of terraced properties which backs on, in close proximity, to another street of terraced properties. The height and positioning of the proposed dormer would be likely to provide intrusive views of the amenity areas and habitable rooms of other properties in the vicinity, particularly at 213 Albany Road, 96 Marlborough Road and 94 Marlborough Road, compromising the privacy of the occupiers of those properties and being detrimental to the amenity of the occupiers.

2. The proposed dormer extension is large and flat roofed, designed with the sole purpose of extending the roof space at 215, Albany Road to the maximum and having no regard to design principles. As such it would represent a large, ugly and incongruous overdevelopment of the site contrary to the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance - Householder Design Guide, which states: “The design of dormer windows should be considered carefully as they can have a significant impact on the character and appearance of a house and the surrounding area. Dormer windows should look as though they are part of the original house – taking into consideration scale, materials, roof shape and windows. Pitched roofed or gabled dormers to the rear of a property are often the most appropriate forms of roof addition to many houses. The acceptability of flat-topped roof extensions will be dependant on the style and character of the house and surrounding area.”

It is our view that the size and design of the proposed dormer conflicts with the good design practice set out in the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance.

19 7.2 The occupiers of 94 Marlborough Road object to the proposal which they state would be detrimental to the privacy and enjoyment of their home and garden. Specifically, they object to the construction of the proposed rear dormer which they consider would have an intrusive view into their property.

7.3 The occupiers of Flat 1, 96 Marlborough Road object to the proposed rear dormer window on the grounds that it would compromise their privacy, which they consider to be a fundamental human right. They state that the occupants of the converted premises would overlook their garden from a distance of only 15 yards and would also be able to look directly into the rear windows of their kitchen/dining room and bedroom which they consider would have an extremely detrimental effect in their privacy.

7.4 The occupier of Flat 2, 96 Marlborough Road objects to the proposed rear dormer window on privacy grounds stating that future occupiers of the flat would be able to look directly into the rear windows of his bedroom.

8. ANALYSIS

8.1 The application seeks planning permission to extend the property and increase the number of flats from two to four, comprising a two bed and single bed flat on the ground floor, a two bed flat on the first floor and a one bed flat on the second floor.

8.2 It is proposed to extend the premises at ground floor level by constructing a flat roof extension, approximately 5.5m x 3.7m in plan, adjacent to the rear annexe of the adjoining property at 217 Albany Road. A flat roofed dormer extension is also proposed on the rear of the property to facilitate the proposed second floor accommodation.

8.3 The principle of increasing the number of flats from two to four is considered to be acceptable. Many of the dwellings within the vicinity of the site have already been converted into flats. Policy 28 ‘Subdivision of Residential Properties’ states that the subdivision of residential property to self contained flats will be favourably considered subject to appropriate provision for car parking, amenity space and refuse disposal together with appropriate external alterations.

8.4 In this case, as no. 215 is an end of terrace property, it occupies a wider plot than many other properties in the vicinity which enables an amenity area to be retained to the side of the existing rear annexe and an area for refuse storage/cycles parking to be provided to the side of the building.

8.5 The proposed single storey rear extension will not be visible within the street scene and will not adversely affect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers, being sited adjacent to the existing single storey annex at the rear of no. 217 and approximately 5.0 metres from the side boundary wall with 213 Albany Road.

8.6 No additional windows are proposed in the side elevation of the property,

20 facing towards 213 Albany Road.

8.7 With respect to the visual impact of the proposed dormer extension on the appearance of the house and surrounding area, advice is provided in the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance : Householder Design Guide. The SPG states that the design of dormer windows should be carefully considered as they have a significant impact on the character and appearance of a house and surrounding area. It states that the acceptability of flat topped roof extensions will be dependent on the style and character of the house and surrounding area. With respect to the size and scale of dormer windows, it states that they should complement the design and proportion of the original building and be set below the original roof ridge and a significant distance from the edge of the roof. The Guidance also says that such extensions should not be built flush with the external wall, but set back to help ensure that they do not dominate the house or street. On terraced properties, the Guidance advises that the scale and positioning of rear dormers should ensure that terracing at roof level is avoided.

8.8 The proposed dormer subject of the current planning application will be located on the rear elevation of the dwelling and will be set 0.3 metres below the existing roof ridge and in from the edge of the roof by 1.1 metres. The base of the roof extension is shown to be set back from the external wall by approximately 1.0 metres. It is considered, therefore, that the dormer extension is in general conforming with the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance. It should also be noted that a similar extension has recently been completed nearby, at 219 Albany Road, as part of the conversion of that property into 4 flats, following the grant of planning permission in 2005.

8.9 The concerns expressed by the occupiers of 94 and 96 Marlborough Road are noted. However, the dormer window will be sited approximately 25.0 metres from the rear garden boundary of these properties and approximately 40.0 metres from the rear of the dwellings themselves. Advice contained in the Council’s approved ‘Householder Design Guide’ refers to a distance of 21.0 metres between rear habitable room windows of houses which directly back onto each to avoid overlooking and to protect neighbouring amenity. It is not considered, therefore, that a refusal of the application on this ground could be justified given the significant distance which separates the proposed dormer from the occupiers in Marlborough Road.

8.10 Whilst ‘angled’ views over the rear of the adjacent property at 213 Albany Road would be possible from the roof extension, a degree of mutual overlooking between adjacent dwellings is common place within such residential areas.

8.11 The proposed pitched roof garage will replace an existing roller shutter door which lies adjacent to the rear lane and extends across the width of the plot. Its proposed design, finished materials (render and slate) and scale (2.4 metres to eaves level rising to a ridge height of 4.2 metres) is considered acceptable for a garage building in this rear lane location where there is

21 considerable variety in the size, appearance and quality of existing outbuildings.

8.12 The western elevation of the proposed garage will adjoin an existing garage/out building at 213 Albany Road. The eastern elevation of the structure will adjoin the boundary with the rear garden of 217 Albany Road for a length of approximately 6.0 metres. Having regard to its single storey scale, it is not considered the proposal would be unduly overbearing in its effect on the amenities of the neighbouring occupiers.

8.13 The Operational Manager, Transportation has raised no objection to the proposal on highway/parking grounds, subject to the provision/retention of the garage parking space.

8.14 Approval is recommended subject to the attached conditions.

22 23 24 25

COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/1317/DCO APPLICATION DATE: 22/07/2010

ED: LLANISHEN

APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission

APPLICANT: Mr A Kata LOCATION: 15 MILL CLOSE, LLANISHEN, CARDIFF, CF14 0XQ PROPOSAL: CONVERSION OF DWELLING HOUSE INTO 2 NO. SELF CONTAINED FLATS WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING AND RETENTION OF EXISTING PORCH EXTENSIONS ______

RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. C01 Statutory Time Limit

2. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered 001A, 002A, 003A and 004 attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application.

3. Within one month of the date of this permission, the ground floor window on the side elevation facing 13 Mill Close shall be non opening below a height of 1.8 metres above internal floor level and glazed with obscure glass and thereafter be so maintained. Reason : To ensure that the privacy of adjoining occupiers is protected.

4. D3D Maintenance of Parking Within Site

5. C7S Details of Refuse Storage

RECOMMENDATION 2: That the applicant be advised to obtain the consent of the Operational Manager, Street Operations, to widen the existing footway to enable 4 no. vehicles to have independent access/egress to the site.

1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 Permission is sought for the conversion of the dwelling house into 2 no. self- contained flats with associated parking and retention of existing porch extensions 15 Mill Close, Llanishen.

1.2 The original proposals sought permission for the subdivision of the dwelling house into 3 no. self contained units. However, amended plans have now been submitted to reduce the amount to 2 no. flats.

26 1.3 Planning permission was granted in July 2009 for a single-storey side extension and front porch extension and canopy (see paragraph 3.1). The proposed flats are accommodated within the extended dwelling. Unit 1 is a 2 no. bedroom flat occupying the majority of the ground floor of the extended dwelling, with rear access to the rear garden. Unit 2 is a 2 no. bedroom flat occupying the entire first floor of the original dwelling, with a lounge and stairway at ground floor.

1.4 4 no. off-street parking spaces are provided on the forecourt, which is laid to hard paving.

1.5 The porch extensions to be retained extend 1.2m beyond the front elevation of the original house and are the full width of the existing dwelling with a hip- roofed design. Part of these porch extensions were approved under planning permission no. 90/0698 (see attached location plan).

1.6 2 no. high level rooflights are proposed to the side (north) elevation of the single-storey extension.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 The site is located within a quiet residential area in a cul-de-sac location characterised by detached dwellings.

3. SITE HISTORY

3.1 09/0648/E: Permission granted in September 2009 for a single-storey extension to side, front porch and pitched roof to side.

4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 The site is on land identified as ‘existing housing’ on the Local Plan Proposals Map.

4.2 The following Local Plan Policies are of relevance to the determination of this application:

11 Design and Aesthetic Quality 17 Parking and Servicing Facilities 28 Subdivision of Residential Property

4.3 The following Policies from the deposit Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) are also of relevance:

2.20 Good Design 2.22 Subdivision of Residential Properties 2.24 Residential Amenity 2.57 Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements

4.4 Supplementary Planning Guidance

Access, Circulation and Parking Standards (January 2010)

5. INTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES

5.1 The Operational Manager, Transportation advises that between 1 and 2 no. spaces are required for a 2 bed flat. Having visited the site he notes that 3 no. vehicles can be satisfactorily accommodated within the existing parking area, which accords with the requirements of the Supplementary Planning Guidance. He therefore has no objection and advises that a condition ensuring the future retention of the frontage area for the parking of vehicles should be added in the event of permission being granted.

5.2 The Operational Manager, Waste Management, advises that the waste storage plans are acceptable.

6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES

6.1 None.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 Local Members have been re-consulted on the amended plans any comments received will be reported to Committee.

7.2 Johnathan Evans MP understands that the dwelling is being converted into flats and is aware that a number of local residents are strongly opposed to the application as they consider it to be entirely out of keeping with the houses in the area. He also understands that the applicant has undertaken unauthorised work elsewhere in the city, which received retrospective planning permission, which suggests that the applicant is presenting the Council with a “fait accompli” whilst circumventing procedures. He also understands that the applicant is therefore placing himself at risk regarding enforcement matters and that no application for building control inspection has been submitted with the Council.

7.3 Neighbours have been consulted. 17 no. individual letters of objection and a petition of 54 no. signatories have been received from occupiers of Mill Close during the consultation on the original plans. A further eleven individual letters of objection have been received from the occupiers of Mill Close during the re- consultation on the amended plans. The objections are summarised as follows:

(i) works have been undertaken without planning permission; (ii) encroachment of building line by porch extensions which are out of character with the cul-de-sac; (iii) insufficient parking provision; causing congestion, disruption and a threat to highway safety through utilising the use of the pavement; (iv) loss of privacy; (v) development would set a precedent;

28 (vi) decrease in property values; (vii) loss of visual amenity; (viii) the proposals ignore a clause in the title deeds requiring property to remain a single dwelling house; (ix) a similar situation occurred in Thornhill with a bungalow converted to flats by the applicant; (x) the applicant is not complying with laws and regulations; (xi) the flats are occupied; (xii) flats are not soundproofed; (xiii) retained garden is insufficient to meet needs of 3 no. flats; (xiv) no provision for refuse storage; (xv) cramped and congested unneighbourly over-development; (xvi) drainage works have not yet been approved; (xvii) no fire escapes from first floor; (xviii) extra strain on utilities; (xix) social disruption; (xx) concerns regarding responsibility for upkeep of garden; (xxi) the previous planning permission was for ancillary accommodation; (xxii) flats, by definition, have one level; and, (xxiii) description is inaccurate as it implies no change from pre-development situation.

8. ANALYSIS

8.1 The key issues for consideration of this application are the principle of subdividing a dwelling house into self-contained flats, the design and appearance of the extended property, the relationship with neighbouring occupiers, and parking and access provision.

8.2 Policy 28 of the City of Cardiff Local Plan (January 1996) and Policy 2.22 of the deposit Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) support the subdivision of dwelling houses into self-contained flats, subject to detailed considerations of car parking, amenity space, and refuse disposal, together with appropriate external alterations.

8.3 The parking and access arrangements are considered to be satisfactory as advised by the Operational Manager, Transportation (paragraph 5.1).

8.4 The existing rear garden is considered to provide an adequate private amenity space for the two flats.

8.5 The Operational Manager, Waste Management, has confirmed that the proposed refuse storage provision is acceptable (paragraph 5.2) and a condition is proposed to secure this provision.

8.6 In addition to the internal alterations, external works have been carried out to facilitate the proposed subdivision of the house. The porch extensions are finished in a mix of brick and white upvc with roof tiles to match the existing house. These porch extensions, which were partly approved under planning permission 09/0648E, cross the full width of the house and whilst the

29 objections of local residents are noted, their size is considered to be proportionate to the main house and the use of materials is not objectionable.

8.7 Conditions are recommended to ensure that the privacy of neighbouring occupiers is safeguarded and that no overlooking would occur into neighbouring properties from substandard distances. The proposed rooflights to the single-storey side extension are high level and do not threaten to harm the privacy of neighbouring occupiers. A side window at ground floor facing No. 13 is to be obscurely glazed and a relevant condition is attached.

8.8 Regarding the objections received from Jonathan Evans MP (see paragraph 7.2):

(i) Any unauthorised works undertaken elsewhere in the city are not of relevance to the determination of this application. (ii) The consideration of this application is not a “fait accompli” and will be determined on its own planning merits; and (iii) Building Control applications are a separate matter to planning applications.

8.9 The objections received from neighbouring occupiers are addressed as follows:

(i) Noted however this application must be determined on its own planning merits. (ii) The porch extensions are single-storey and no significant encroachment of the building line would result. In any case, the extant permission approved a porch extension of a similar depth. The design and appearance of the porch extension is considered to be satisfactory. (iii) The parking provision is considered to be acceptable (see paragraph 5.1). (iv) Satisfactory privacy can be retained for the adjoining occupiers through relevant conditions. (v) No precedent would be established as each application is determined on its own planning merits. (vi) Property values are not a material planning consideration. (vii) The proposals are not considered to result in an unacceptable loss of visual amenity. (viii) Any clause in title deeds is not a planning matter and legal advice should be sought. (ix) Members are advised that the ‘Thornhill case’ was reported to Planning Committee in July 2007 where Members were minded to grant retrospective planning permission (ref: 07/1267/E). (x) Noted however this is not a planning matter. (xi) Noted; however the occupation of the flats is at the applicants own risk. (xii) The soundproofing of flats is a matter for building control. (xiii) The amenity space provision is considered to be acceptable. (xiv) See paragraph 8.5. Refuse storage is proposed, has been found to be acceptable by the Operational Manager Waste Management and its provision would be secured via conditions.

30 (xv) The proposals are not considered to be cramped, congested or constitute over-development. The internal floorspace of each flat exceeds the 30 square metre standard applied by the Council. (xvi) Drainage works are subject to Building Control approval. (xvii) Fire escapes are a matter for Building Control. (xviii) Utilities would be assessed as part of a building control application. (xix) Social disruption is not a planning matter. (xx) The maintenance of the property is not a planning matter. (xxi) Noted however this application must be determined on its own planning merits. (xxii) flats can have more than one level; and (xxiii) the amended description is accurate as the porch extensions currently exist on site.

8.10 It is considered that the amended proposals accord with relevant local planning policies and satisfy the requirements for conversions of a single dwelling house into self-contained flats. It is therefore recommended that permission be granted subject to relevant conditions.

31 32 33 LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION

COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/1357/DCO APPLICATION DATE: 23/07/2010

ED: HEATH

APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission

APPLICANT: Diagonal Properties Ltd. LOCATION: 5 HEATH PARK LANE, CARDIFF, CF14 4AL PROPOSAL: CREATION OF NEW DWELLING ALONGSIDE EXISTING BUILDING. ______

RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. C01 Statutory Time Limit

2. The car parking spaces shown on the approved plans shall be provided prior to the development being brought into beneficial use and thereafter shall be maintained and shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking of vehicles. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic passing along the highway in accordance with policy 17 of the Cardiff Local Plan and policy 2.57 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan.

3. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme of construction management shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, to include details of construction traffic routes, the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors, loading and unloading of plant and materials, storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development, site hoardings, site access and wheel washing facilities. The construction shall be managed strictly in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity, in accordance with policy 2.57 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan.

4. No development shall take place until ground permeability tests have been undertaken to ascertain whether sustainable drainage techniques can be utilised and a scheme for the drainage of the site, including the disposal of surface water and any connection to the existing drainage system, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include sustainable drainage techniques if, as a result of the ground permeability tests, these have been found to be feasible. No part of the development shall be occupied

34 until the drainage scheme is carried out and completed as approved. Reason: In the interests of the proper drainage of the site, in accordance with policy 2.61 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan.

5. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order) no windows shall be inserted in the side elevation of the dwelling house hereby approved other than those shown on the approved plans. Reason : To ensure that the privacy of adjoining occupiers is protected in accordance with policy 2.24 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary development Plan.

6. Prior to the commencement of development, details of the proposed means of site enclosure shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted details shall include lockable gates or bollards to enclose the parking area at the rear of the site. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of the dwelling hereby approved. Reason: In the interests of visual and residential amenity and site security, in accordance with policy 11 of the Cardiff Local Plan and policies 2.20 and 2.24 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan.

(i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and; (ii) safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.

The local planning authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be

35 considered free from contamination.

RECOMMENDATION 4: The developer is advised that foul and surface water discharges must be drained separately from the site and that no land drainage run-off shall be permitted to connect (either directly or indirectly) to the public sewerage system.

RECOMMENDATION 3: The developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru Welsh Water’s Network Development Consultants on 01443 331155 prior to any development being undertaken if a connection to the public sewerage system is required.

1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 The application seeks full planning permission for the addition of a two storey, 3 bedroom house to the side of an existing semi-detached dwelling. The new dwelling will be 6m wide and will be flush with the front and rear elevations of the adjoining building, with a single storey extension projecting 3.2m to the rear. It will have a hipped roof and bay windows to match the existing house and will be finished in matching materials (spar dash render and concrete roof tiles).

1.2 An existing garage at the rear of the site will be retained for no. 5 Heath Park Lane and 2 additional parking spaces, which will be accessible to both properties, will be provided adjacent to the garage. The garage and parking spaces will be accessed from the rear lane.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.2 The site is the existing side and rear garden of a mid-20th century semi- detached house. The house has a hipped roof, bay windows to the front and a small single storey extension at the rear. There are 3 pairs of identical semi- detached properties located along Heath Park Lane, which is a narrow pedestrian footpath linking St Agnes Road and Caerphilly Road. Vehicular access is available only via the lane at the rear of the houses.

3. SITE HISTORY

None.

4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 Cardiff Local Plan:

10 (Contaminated or Unstable Land); 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality); 12 (Energy Efficient Design); 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities); 18 (Provision for Cyclists); 19 (Provision for Pedestrians);

36 28 (Subdivision of Residential Property); 30 (Insensitive or Inappropriate Infilling);

Supplementary Planning Guidance - Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements (January 2010); Cardiff Residential Design Guide (March 2008); Waste Collection and Storage Facilities (March 2007)

4.2 Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan:

2.20 (Good Design); 2.22 (Subdivision of Residential Properties); 2.24 (Residential Amenity); 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements); 2.63 (Contaminated and Unstable Land); 2.74 (Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development).

4.3 Planning Policy Wales (2010):

4.10.9: Visual appearance, scale and relationship to surroundings and context are material planning considerations. 4.10.11: Local planning authorities and developers should consider the issue of accessibility for all. 4.10.12: Local Authorities are under a legal obligation to consider the need to prevent and reduce crime and disorder in all decisions that they take. 4.11.2: Development proposals should mitigate the causes of climate change by minimising carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions associated with their design, construction, use and eventual demolition. 4.11.3: Development proposals should also include features that provide effective adaptation to and resilience against the current and predicted future effects of climate change, for example by incorporating green space to provide shading, sustainable drainage systems to reduce run-off , and are designed to prevent over-heating and to avoid the need for artificial cooling of buildings. 4.11.4: sets out the sustainability standards that the Assembly Government expects new buildings to meet. 8.4.2: minimum parking standards are no longer appropriate. 8.7.3: The proposed access to a development should reflect the likely travel patterns involved. 9.3.1: New housing should be well integrated with and connected to the existing pattern of settlements. 9.3.2: Sensitive infilling may be acceptable though much will depend on the character of the surroundings. 9.3.3: Insensitive infilling or the cumulative effects of development or redevelopment should not be allowed to damage an area’s character and amenity.

4.4 Technical Advice Note 12 (Design):

5.11.3: The design of housing layouts and built form should respect local context and distinctiveness.

5.. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

5.1 Operational Manager Transportation:

Two parking spaces are proposed in association with new dwelling, there will be no displacement of parking associated with the existing dwelling, and the spaces are set back sufficiently to ensure that adequate manoeuvring is available. In this respect the proposal is therefore satisfactory subject to a condition relating to future retention of parking.

5.2 There are concerns with regards to access by construction vehicles/storage of materials etc. The rear lane is the sole means of vehicular access to the existing properties on Heath Park Lane, and also to the rear parking for a number of properties on St George’s Road. In the interests highway safety/public amenity/access by emergency vehicles etc. a condition should be imposed requiring approval and implementation of a scheme of construction management.

5.3 Chief Officer Highways and Waste Management (Drainage):

No objection in principle. The applicant refers to the disposal of surface water to a soakaway but no ground permeability tests have been undertaken, therefore a condition should be added requiring permeability tests to ascertain whether sustainable drainage techniques can be utilised and a drainage scheme should be submitted for approval.

5.4 Chief Officer Strategic Planning and Environment (Pollution Control):

No objections. Standard recommendations relating to construction site noise and contaminated/unstable land.

5.5 Chief Officer Highways and Waste Management (Waste):

No objections. Waste must not be stored on the highway. 6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

6.1 Welsh Water:

Foul and surface water must be drained separately. No land drainage run-off shall be permitted to discharge to the public sewerage system. The developer should consider the use of SUDS techniques.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 The application was advertised by neighbour notification. 6 letters have been received objecting to the development on the following grounds:

(1) Increased congestion in the rear access lane. (2) Construction vehicles will not be able to access the site safely and the

38 lane will be blocked by construction vehicles and building materials; (3) Loss of privacy to 3 and 4 Heath Park Lane. (4) Loss of light to 3 and 4 Heath Park Lane. (5) The value of adjacent properties will decrease. (6) The dwelling will be out of keeping with the appearance of the lane. (7) The drains in the area are inadequate to cope with the development. (8) The rear lane is unlit and the new parking area may attract criminal or anti-social behaviour. (9) There are Deeds of Covenant attached to these properties. (10) Pedestrian access along the front of the properties could be disrupted. Waste and recycling bags could obstruct the lane; (11) Lack of parking spaces in the area is already a problem. This will be exacerbated by the proposed development.

7.2 Councillor Fenella Bowden endorses the comments of the objectors with regard to access to the rear of the property and to the terracing effect that would occur. She states that at the moment the Lane is made up of three pairs of semi-detached houses which are balanced in appearance. To add a semi-detached dwelling to number 5 would result in a terrace of 3 properties and this will not only have a significant impact on their appearance and the street scene, but also on the amenity of the neighbours. She shares the concerns of residents about the rear access to the properties. This is a very difficult lane and, whilst it is appreciated that the means by which the developer will access the site during the building process is not a planning matter, the resulting access of a vehicle may be problematical.

7.3 Councillor Bowden requests that this application is referred to the Planning Committee for decision.

8. ANALYSIS

8.1 The site lies within an existing, highly accessible residential area therefore there are no objections to the principle of the development. The site is large enough to accommodate a dwelling house of the same dimensions as the adjoining property along with off-street parking for three vehicles and an adequate amount of outdoor amenity space to the rear. Although the land is currently part of the garden of 5 Heath Park Lane, the curtilage of no. 5 is significantly larger than others along the lane and the development will not result in insufficient garden space or parking space remaining for the existing property.

8.2 It is not considered that the development would adversely affect visual amenity or the character of the area. Although it would result in the formation of a “terrace” of 3 houses within a row of semi-detached dwellings, the site is not in a prominent location and is visible from a public viewpoint only from the narrow footpath at the front of the house and from the rear access lane. The side of the new dwelling would be briefly visible from North Road in the gap between 3 and 4 Heath Park Lane. The building line and width of frontage will be maintained, and the style, form and detailing will be consistent with the adjacent dwellings.

8.3 With regard to the objections received:

(1) The additional traffic generated by one extra dwelling will not significantly increase congestion in the lane. No objections have been raised by the Transportation officer on these grounds. (2) Access for construction traffic can be controlled via a construction management scheme. (3) The windows of the new dwelling will overlook parts of the gardens of 3 and 4 Heath Park Lane. No windows will face towards existing windows in adjacent properties at a distance of less than 21m. A significant amount of neighbouring garden space will not be overlooked by the new building, therefore potential loss of privacy is not considered severe enough to warrant the refusal of planning permission. (4) No. 4 Heath Park Lane lies to the south west of the application site and will not be overshadowed by the development. There would be limited overshadowing of no. 3, which would mainly affect part of the garden. It is not considered that loss of light to adjoining properties would be severe enough to justify refusing planning permission. One corner of the new dwelling would be only 1m from the boundary with no. 3 but the orientation of the buildings will be such that the new dwelling will not appear unduly overbearing. Although it will result in this part of the lane appearing less “open” than at present, this loss of openness is not considered to be so damaging to amenity as to justify refusing the application. (5) The potential effect of development on property values is not a material planning consideration. (6) See 8.2 above. (7) No concerns have been raised by Welsh Water or the Council’s drainage engineer. (8) The proposed parking area will be overlooked from the rear of the house and the gardens will be bounded by a 1.8m high wall. It is unlikely that the presence of parking spaces would attract anti-social behaviour that would affect surrounding properties. A condition can be imposed to ensure that the parking area is gated or that bollards are installed to deter vehicle theft. (9) Deeds of covenant are legal matters and do not have any bearing on the determination of a planning application. (10) Possible obstruction of the footpath is not sufficient justification for refusal of this application. There is ample space for the storage of waste and recycling within the site and the situation regarding waste and recycling bags will be the same for the new property as for the existing houses in the lane. The limited increase in the use of the path will not lead to its becoming obstructed, (11) The Transportation officer has raised no objections relating to parking provision for the proposed development.

8.4 Councillor Bowden’s concerns regarding access are discussed at 8.3 above and the issue of “terracing” and the effect on the character of the lane is dealt

40 with at paragraph 8.2.

8.5 In conclusion, the proposed development is considered to represent an efficient use of urban land in an accessible location. The appearance of the dwelling will harmonise with existing buildings in the area and the reduction in privacy and general amenity currently enjoyed by neighbouring residents will be within acceptable limits. There are no sustainable objections on traffic or parking grounds and approval is recommended.

41 42 43 44 45 COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/1423/DCO APPLICATION DATE: 06/08/2010

ED: HEATH

APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission

APPLICANT: Cardiff and Vale University Local Health Board LOCATION: CHILDRENS HOSPITAL, UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF WALES, KING GEORGE V DRIVE EAST, HEATH PROPOSAL: CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOR WALES PHASE 2 ______

RECOMMENDATION 1: That, subject to persons having relevant interest in the application site entering into a binding planning obligation in agreement with the Council under SECTION 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 encompassing the matters referred to in paragraphs 5.1 and 8.8 Chief Strategic Planning and Environment Officer's report planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. C01 Statutory Time Limit

2. D3D Maintenance of Parking Within Site

3. C4P Landscaping Design & Implementation Pro

4. C4P Landscaping Design & Implementation Pro

5. C1G BREEAM - Overarching Condition

6. C1H BREEAM - Pre-Commencement Condition

7. C1I BREEAM - Post Construction Condition

8. No development shall take place until a scheme for the drainage of the site and any connection to the existing drainage system has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. No part of the development shall be occupied until the scheme is carried out and completed as approved. Reason: To ensure an orderly form of development.

9. E1B Samples of Materials

10. C3S Cycle Parking

11. C7S Details of Refuse Storage

12. This consent relates to the application as supplemented by the information contained in the email communication from the Agent dated

46 15th September, 2010. Reason: The information provided forms part of the application.

13. D7Z Contaminated materials

14. E7Z Imported Aggregates

15. Details of a traffic management plan for construction operations (as outlined in Section 2.6 of the Design and Access Statement) shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plan, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To minimise disruption to existing traffic movements in the vicinity of the site, in the interest of highway safety and convenience.

RECOMMENDATION 2: The applicant is encouraged to liaise with the Council’s Travel Plan Officer who can provide support and guidance in respect of the ongoing implementation and development of the UHW Travel Plan.

(i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints and; (ii) safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.

The local planning authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination.

RECOMMENDATION 4: To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity attention is drawn to the provisions of Section 60 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in relation to the control of noise from demolition and construction activities. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations.

47 1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 This full planning application seeks permission for the second and final phase of the Children’s Hospital for Wales at the University Hospital, Heath, Cardiff.

1.2 The proposal involves the construction of a new five storey building (together with roof top plant) on land adjacent to the existing phase 1 Children’s Hospital, following demolition of primarily single storey accommodation currently occupying the site.

1.3 It is intended that the building will be integrated with phase 1 of the Children’s Hospital, which was completed in 2004. It will include amongst other facilities, operating theatres, critical care wards, in-patient wards, radiology and outpatients, providing services to children from infants to the age of sixteen.

Design

1.4 The application is supported by a comprehensive Design and Access Statement which outlines in detail the evaluation processes that have been undertaken and from which the final design proposals have evolved. The proposed layout of the site, together with the external appearance and design of the building are shown on the attached plans.

1.5 The main pedestrian entrance to the building will be through the original phase 1 entrance with a service entrance at the western end.

1.6 The building form takes a simple ‘T’ shape with the head of the ‘T’ providing a strong urban edge along Heath Park Way to the north. The stem of the ‘T’, running north-south, provides a softer building form with the massing broken up and with large areas of glazing to maximise sunlight into the building. The footprint of the proposed building is arranged to provide a central landscaped courtyard defined by a square of open space between phases 1 and 2. The Agents advise that the provision of this open space area is a key element in the design concept of the proposed development.

1.7 The articulation of the principal public elevation to the north seeks to integrate the new building with the existing Children’s Hospital, whilst providing a separate identity, by expanding the palette of materials and forms used in phase 1 (see attached elevation plans). The building steps up incrementally away from the main entrance to the Children’s Hospital so as not to dominate the existing massing of phase 1 or the adjacent Women’s Services building, to the west.

1.8 The Design and Access Statement advises that the orientation of the building has been designed to maximise, where possible, the benefits of natural light and ventilation and to utilise the site to its greatest potential. For example, the north elevation windows are enlarged with low cills to allow bed bound patients a view of over Heath Park. To the south, the windows and curtain walling allow views over the courtyard and the glazing is softened by the

48 introduction of solar shading in a variety of colours.

1.9 The principal landscaped area within the site comprises the large internal courtyard which is intended to provide a calming therapeutic space and external exercise ‘wandering loop’.

1.10 The submitted Design and Access Statement incorporates a summary of the actions incorporated by the applicants and their design team to meet a range of Secured by Design measures, resulting from pre-application discussions with South Wales Police Architectural Liaison Officers.

1.11 The Agents advise that there is a requirement to achieve a BREAAM rating by Welsh Health Estates with a target that an ‘Excellent’ BREEAM score be achieved. The Design and Access Statement contains extracts from the BREEAM pre-assessment which currently gives the building a pre- consultation BREEAM ‘Very Good’ rating.

1.12 With regard to transportation/highway matters the following points are considered material:

(i) to minimise disruption to existing traffic arrangements within the Hospital, a traffic management plan will be employed during the construction period, (as referred to in section 2.6 of the submitted Design and Access Statement); (ii) nine existing parking spaces to be lost as a result of the development of the site are to be replaced with nine new spaces on nearby land, next to the junction Heath Park Way and Central Way; (iii) the agents have submitted the latest University Hospital of Wales Travel Plan by way of illustrating the applicant’s support for sustainable travel.

1.13 In addition to the Design Access Statement and Travel Plan, the application is also supported by a Tree Report. The Report recommends that a number of trees located within a landscaped area, opposite the existing Children’s Hospital along Central Way, be subject to crown lifting to facilitate access for portable temporary buildings. It is evident, however, that the temporary buildings are already in situ.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 The application site lies immediately adjacent to the existing Children’s Hospital, near the junction of Heath Park Way and Circle Way West towards the northern end of the Hospital complex. The site is currently occupied by existing accommodation, primarily single storey but with elements rising to two storeys. To the south lies near the main Hospital entrance and concourse leading to buildings which rise up to nine storeys in height.

3. SITE HISTORY

3.1 Planning permission was granted for the construction of the first phase of the Children’s Hospital in March 2003 (Ref. 03/133N).

4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 The application site is situated within the Campus of the University Hospital of Wales, Heath.

4.2 Relevant policies of the adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan include:

Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) Policy 12 (Energy Efficient Design) Policy 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities) Policy 18 (Provision for Cyclists Policy 19 (Provision for Pedestrians)

4.3 Relevant policies of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) include:

Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity) Policy 2.45 (Trees Woodlands and Hedgerows) Policy 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements) Policy 2.63 (Contaminated and Unstable Land) Policy 2.64 (Air, Noise and Light Pollution)

4.4 Supplementary Planning Guidance : Access, Circulation and Parking. Supplementary Planning Guidance : Trees and Development.

4.5 Planning Policy Wales (Version 3, July 2010)

TAN 12 : Design TAN 22 : Sustainable Design

5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

5.1 The Operational Manager, Transportation advises that he has no objection to the proposed development, in principle. He notes that the nine existing parking spaces that will be displaced as a consequence of the proposed development will be satisfactorily replaced in the near vicinity. A condition is requested to ensure the provision/retention of the spaces.

He also notes that as a major employer the hospital already operates an adequate Travel Plan which promotes alternative modes of travel to the private car. Nevertheless, he would suggest a second recommendation advising the applicant of the benefits to be gained from liaison with the Council’s Travel Plan Operator, with a view to monitoring and enhancement of the Plan in the future on an on-going basis.

In line with the current policy to reduce car dependency, the Officer has also requested a public transport enhancement contribution of £3,120 be secure via a Section 106 Agreement.

5.2 The Operational Manager, Waste Management, advises that a waste strategy should be implemented in order to meet future waste minimisation and recycling targets and refers the Agent to the Council’s approved Supplementary Planning Guidance : Waste and Collection and Storage Facilities for further relevant information (Condition 11 relating to refuse storage is recommended).

5.3 The Strategic Planning Manager (Urban Design) comments as follows:

The application seeks planning permission for the development of Phase 2 of a Children’s Hospital facility following construction of Phase 1.

The design statement identifies that the proposal is based upon researched evidence on designing for healthcare and that it has been designed to balance the aesthetic and clinical needs of users. To achieve this, the design process has been informed by the ‘clinical services brief’.

While the proposal is for a significantly larger building than the principally single storey one currently located on site, its scale is considered to be appropriate given the scale and massing of other buildings located within the immediate area. The proposal would be of a similar height to the part of Phase 1 with which it would be connected and to the building located to the east. While the proposal would be taller than the buildings located on the northern side of Heath Park Way and sit marginally closer to them than the existing, the height of the proposal is not considered to be significantly greater as to warrant concern in this instance.

The materials proposed for use within the scheme would sit comfortably with those used in phase 1 while the provision of colour within certain features of the building would ensure it enlivens the otherwise grey and dull hospital complex. The development would however have limited impact upon the adjacent park or neighbouring residential streets.

A courtyard area is proposed within the scheme which the design statement identifies as having been designed to address the needs of users to provide a therapeutic space and an external exercise area. This space would be accessible through a number of doors located along a concourse which would run around the majority of the internal area of the ground floor of the proposed new building. The courtyard would be overlooked by numerous windows from both phases 1 and 2 and other surrounding buildings creating a safe environment.

It is proposed that the main pedestrian access to the development would be through Phase 1. Public access to the development would also be achievable through a link located on the first floor between the proposal and another hospital building.

Hospital staff will be able to access the new building via both the main public access points and a number of alternatives. These include a corridor

51 linking the development with the southern end of Phase 1, an emergency entrance via a sky link corridor located on the third floor and an entrance proposed on the ground floor via an alleyway leading from Heath Park Way. Consideration should be given to ensuring that the route receives adequate levels of natural surveillance or provision of appropriate security features.

The majority of people will access the proposed development through Phase 1, and as such, consideration of a safe and accessible public realm within the area will have been considered and implemented within the development of this phase. As such the pedestrian routes leading to and from the buildings access and the surrounding facilities should be appropriate. Given that the proposed development would bring about a marked change along Heath Park Way, provision of a safe, quality public realm / pedestrian environment would be expected along the road. The route should also receive adequate levels of natural surveillance.

It is noted from the DAS that the design is intended to target a BREEAM ‘Excellent’ rating. The pre-assessment report submitted in the DAS identifies the current position of the Children’s Hospital unit as giving a pre- construction ‘very good’ rating. This indicates that the development is expected to achieve the target set in Planning Policy Wales.

5.4 The Strategic Planning Manager (Natural Environment Group) notes that although the submitted Design and Access Statement refers to the principles of landscaping, little detail is provided and consequently he advises that conditions C4P (Landscape Design and Implementation Programme) and C4R (Landscape Maintenance) be attached to any planning permission that may be issued.

5.5 The Chief Highways and Waste Management Officer (Drainage) advises that a drawing entitled ' Proposed Drainage Scheme' appears to show, in the case of Foul Drainage, an intention to dispose of foul flows via new and existing private sewers which it can be assumed, drain in turn to the local Public Foul or Combined sewer network.

He notes that a similar drainage solution is proposed with respect to surface water flows generated by the new development which it is intended will be drained without restriction to the local Public Sewer network, presumably in this case a large diameter Public Surface Water sewer situated to the east of the site.

He states that the applicant should note if sustainable drainage techniques are not found to be appropriate for the development, discharge to either Public Surface Water sewers or watercourses/culverts will require approval from Welsh Water or the Council as appropriate, and, such approval, if granted, may be conditional on a restriction on the rate of discharge from the completed site to be achieved by the installation of on-site storage facilities in conjunction with an approved discharge control device.

52 He requests that details of the application be forwarded to Dwr Cymru Welsh Water Network Development Consultants for comment and consideration. (Note, a copy of the Officer’s representations have been forwarded to the Agents for their guidance).

5.6 The Operational Manager, Parks Services has no comments to make in respect of the application.

5.7 The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) requests conditions D7Z (Imported Materials) and E7Z (Imported Aggregates) together with informatives R1 Construction Site Noise and R4 Contamination and Unstable Land Advisory Notice.

6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

6.1 South Wales Police (Crime Prevention Design Advisor) advise that they have no objections to the proposals as extensive pre-application discussions have taken place which have been reflected in the Design and Access Statement submitted with the application.

6.2 Welsh Water/Dwr Cymru has advised that appropriate drainage conditions should be imposed to ensure no detriment to the environment and the Company’s assets. Details of a water main in the vicinity of the site have also been provided.

(Note: A copy of the company’s comments has been forwarded to the Agents for their information).

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 The application has been advertised on site and in the press. No representations have been received.

7.2 Local Members have been consulted on the application. No representations have been received.

7.3 The Heath Residents Association has been notified of the application. No representations have been received.

8. ANALYSIS

8.1 The application proposes the construction of the second phase of the Children’s Hospital for Wales, to be located on a site next to the existing Children’s Hospital, at the northern end of the hospital Campus, near the junction of Heath Park Way and Central Way. The existing buildings on the site, which are primarily single storey in scale, will be demolished to facilitate the proposed development.

8.2 The main planning issues are considered to relate to:

(i) the design and appearance of the proposed building and its likely effect on the character and appearance of the area; (ii) the likely effect on the amenities of residential occupiers; (iii) transportation/parking issues.

8.3 The massing of the proposed building, which rises to five storeys (plus a services/plant floor) has been designed to respond to the scale of the adjoining Phase 1 Children’s Hospital, which rises to four storeys (plus plant). The site is within an area of the Campus which contains buildings of varying height and massing up to nine storeys.

8.4 The Strategic Planning Manager (Urban Design) is satisfied that the proposed building responds satisfactorily to this urban grain and is appropriate in terms of height and massing.

8.5 The design proposals bring the building towards the back edge of the footway along Heath Park Way. This will be the principle public face of the development. Such a relationship is considered to be acceptable having regard to the context of the site, where the building will physically adjoin the existing Children’s Hospital which has a similar relationship to the adjacent road, and architectural detailing of the northern elevation with its large coloured recesses ‘scoped’ out of the façade.

8.6 The application site located approximately 200 metres from the closet dwelling, in King George V Drive East, and is screened in views from the east, west and south by other large buildings. The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) has raised no objection to the proposal on noise grounds subject to an informative relating to construction site noise (see recommendations). Having regard to the siting of the building within the hospital campus, it is not considered that the proposal will have a significant impact upon the residential amenity of the area.

8.7 The Operational Manager, Transportation has raised no objections to the proposal on highway/transportation grounds. He states that the site is well served by public transport and car parking provision, and that UHW operates a comprehensive and robust Travel Plan. He notes that the proposed extension will displace nine existing parking spaces but that these are to be replaced elsewhere within the Campus.

8.8 In line with policy guidance on sustainability the Officer has requested a financial contribution of £3,120 towards public transport enhancement with the sum to be used for the provision of a crime camera within a near bus shelter. The Agent has confirmed the Applicant’s agreement to this request.

8.9 It is recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to appropriate conditions and to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure the public transport contribution referred to above.

54 55 56 57 58 COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/1541/DCO APPLICATION DATE: 19/08/2010

ED: LLANDAFF

APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission

APPLICANT: Cathedral School LOCATION: THE MEMORIAL HALL, HIGH STREET, LLANDAFF, CARDIFF, CF5 2DX PROPOSAL: CHANGE OF USE FROM D2 (LEISURE TO D1 (NON RESIDENTIAL INSTITUTION) FOR FUTURE USE AS MULTI PURPOSE HALL FOR USE BY CATHEDRAL SCHOOL AND FOR COMMUNITY USE OUTSIDE SCHOOL HOURS AND EVENTS ______

RECOMMENDATION 1: That, subject to persons having relevant interest in the application site entering into a binding planning obligation in agreement with the Council under SECTION 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 encompassing the matters referred to in paragraphs 1.6 and 5.2 of the Chief Strategic Planning and Environment Officer's report planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. C01 Statutory Time Limit

2. The premises shall be used for the purpose specified in the application and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class D1 of the schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order). Reason: Permission is granted only because of the characteristics peculiar to this proposal. Other uses within Class D1 could prejudice the amenities of the area.

3. No member of the public shall be admitted to or allowed to remain on the premises between the hours of 2200 and 0800 on any day. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity of the site are protected.

4. D7U Amplified Music

5. C7S Details of Refuse Storage

6. C3S Cycle Parking

RECOMMENDATION 2: The applicant be advised to contact the Council’s Travel Plan officer to provide public transport and non-car modes information to encourage more sustainable modes of travel.

1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 Permission is sought for change of use from Class D2 (Leisure) to Class D1 (Non-Residential Institutions) for future use as multi purpose hall for use by Cathedral School and for community use outside school hours and events.

1.2 The applicant intends to use the building as an annex to the Cathedral School as a multi-purpose hall for the school’s infants and juniors.

1.3 No alterations or extensions are proposed to the external fabric of the building, which comprises approximately 270 square metres.

1.4 An access statement has been submitted with the application which states that pupils will walk between the main school and the site to attend lessons or activities. Existing arrangements for dropping off pupils will remain and the hall would not function as a separate school department.

1.5 The access statement also states that the change of use would not give rise to any additional vehicular traffic movement in the Llandaff area within the morning and afternoon school peaks. In addition, it claims there will be a reduction in parking demand during weekdays with the potential for increased parking demand in the evenings.

1.6 The agent confirms that their clients will be prepared to enter into a planning agreement which secures wider community use of the premises on a not for profit basis. This would be available to many groups and organisations as well as individuals who may want to hire the facility on a one off basis. The upkeep and maintenance of the Hall would be the responsibility of the Cathedral School. He suggests that the following could form the heads of terms of such an agreement:

(i) The creation of a Working Group to deal with the management and allocation of time available at the Hall. He suggests that such a group would include the Cathedral School Bursar, a representative from the Llandaff Society, a member of the community nominated by the Council and the Head or Deputy Head of the school. Such a group would also have regard to the effect of any proposed user on neighbouring occupiers;

(ii) The school to publish its timetable for the potential community use of the Hall in advance of each school term providing, as a minimum, the following times:

• a minimum of 3 school evenings every school week (19.00 – 22.00); • at least 2 no. 2 hour sessions during school hours specifically for a ‘stay and play’ facility aimed at pre-school aged children during school hours; • on Saturdays between 10.00 – 22.00 subject to occasional school use;

60 • on Sundays between 12.00 – 18.00 subject to occasional school use; • during school holidays to run a community holiday club for children of infant and junior school age and to make the Hall available each evening from 19.00 – 22.00;and • in the event of unforeseen circumstances when the hall is required by the school at short notice to use reasonable endeavours to accommodate booked community uses elsewhere.

1.7 The agent confirms that there is no intention to use the hall for loud music events or activities that might be audible from surrounding properties in the evening. The suggested 22.00 closing would dissuade potentially noisier events.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 The detached single-storey building is located adjacent to the main car park serving the neighbouring Llandaff district shopping centre. It is located within the Llandaff Conservation Area.

2.2 A children’s play centre currently operates from the premises, with opening hours of 10.00 – 18.00 Monday to Saturday.

2.3 A terrace of residential properties is located immediately adjacent to the south of the building on Chapel Street,

2.4 A public right of way links the car park to Cardiff Road immediately south of the building.

3. SITE HISTORY

3.1 A/96/0117/W: Consent granted in August 1996 for advertisement.

3.2 94/1397/W: Permission granted in October 1994 for children’s adventure play area consisting of castles plus a soft play area suitable for age range 2-10 years.

3.3 11824 : Permission granted in October 1956 for the erection of a church hall.

4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 The site is identified as existing housing on the Local Plan Proposals Map (January 1996).

4.2 The following Local Plan Policies are of relevance to the determination of this application:

3 Development in Conservation Areas 11 Design and Aesthetic Quality 17 Parking and Servicing Facilities

4.3 The following Policies from the deposit Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) are also of relevance:

2.20 Good Design 2.24 Residential Amenity 2.53 Conservation Areas 2.57 Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements

4.4 The “Access, Circulation and Parking Standards” Supplementary Planning Guidance is relevant (January 2010).

4.5 The Llandaff Conservation Area Appraisal (2006) is relevant.

5. INTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES

5.1 The Strategic Planning Manager (Conservation) has been consulted on the proposals and any comments received will be reported to Committee.

5.2 The Operational Manager, Transportation, has no objection to the proposed change of use acknowledging that the proposals would not detrimentally impact upon the existing situation in terms of trip generation and no additional vehicular traffic movements would occur. In order to encourage more sustainable mode choices it is recommended that cycle parking spaces are introduced within the Council car park for the benefit of all users/visitors to the site and district centre. A sum of £2,080 is requested to achieve this, which would be secure through the completion of a Section 106 Agreement.

5.3 The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control), recommends conditions restricting the opening hours from 08.00 to 22.00 on any day and the requirement for a sound insulation scheme to be submitted and approved prior to beneficial use.

5.4 The Operational Manager, Waste Management advises that no refuse storage facilities are shown on the plans. Details are requested.

6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES

6.1 No relevant consultations.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 Local Members have been consulted. Any comments received will be reported to Committee.

7.2 The Llandaff Conservation Group has no adverse comments.

7.3 The proposals were advertised by site notice under Section 73 of The Town and Country Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. The consultation period expired on 7 October 2010.

7.4 The existing occupier of the premises has objected to the proposals as it would result in the closure of their children’s play centre business. They state that the proposed sale of the hall to the Cathedral School has occurred without their knowledge. Their lease agreement has now expired however they have continued to pay rent. They claim to offer the only indoor play centre in west and north Cardiff.

7.5 A petition of over 400 signatures objecting to the application has been submitted by the owner of the existing children’s play centre, stating that the facility currently offers a much needed facility for children in the local and wider community.

7.6 123 no. signed letters of objection have been received from residents of various communities around west and north Cardiff, together with residents of Pontprennau and St. Mellons, and from residents further afield including Mountain Ash, Hengoed, Penarth, and Barry. As regular users of the existing play centre, they object to the loss of the existing facility as it is the only indoor play facility in Llandaff and its closure would have a negative impact upon Llandaff and the wider community.

8. ANALYSIS

8.1 The key issues for consideration are the impact upon the Llandaff conservation area, the relationship with neighbouring occupiers, and the parking and access aspects of the proposals.

8.2 Given that no extensions or alterations are proposed to the external fabric of the building, it is not considered that the proposals would have a harmful impact upon the character or appearance of the conservation area.

8.3 It is noted that no neighbouring occupiers have objected to the proposals. Subject to conditions restricting the hours of use and a scheme of sound insulation works, it is considered that the amenities of these neighbouring occupiers can be satisfactorily safeguarded. The agents have offered to enter into a Section 106 Agreement to set up a working group to manage the use of the community hall by community groups. The precise terms are detailed in paragraph 1.6 and are welcomed to ensure the effective management of the premises.

8.4 The parking and access arrangements are considered to be acceptable, as advised by the Operational Manager, Transportation, subject to the completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure the provision of cycle parking in the neighbouring car park (see paragraph 5.2). The agent has confirmed their clients are willing to enter into such an agreement.

8.5 Concerning the petition and objections to the closure of the existing children’s play centre, these representations are noted. However, the site is in private ownership and the application must be determined on its own planning merits. It is noted that the proposed change of use includes the continued availability

63 of the premises for community use outside school hours and events, for which the terms would be secured through the completion of a legal agreement (see paragraph 1.6).

8.6 It is recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to relevant conditions and the completion of a legal agreement to ensure the terms detailed in paragraphs 1.6 and 5.2 are secured.

64 65 LOCAL MEMBER COMMENTS

COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/00921/E APPLICATION DATE: 27/05/2010

ED: LLANRUMNEY

APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission

APPLICANT: RJS Building Contractors LOCATION: CARPENTERS ARMS, 751 NEWPORT ROAD, LLANRUMNEY, CARDIFF, CF3 4AJ PROPOSAL: DEMOLITION OF EXISTING PUBLIC HOUSE & CONSTRUCTION OF NEW SINGLE STOREY BUILDING SHELL FOR FITTING-OUT AS A1 USE CLASS CONVENIENCE STORE, COMPLETE WITH SERVICING & CAR PARK.

______

RECOMMENDATION 1: That, subject to persons having relevant interest in the application site entering into a binding planning obligation in agreement with the Council under SECTION 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 encompassing the matters referred to in paragraph 5.1 and 8.12 of the Chief Strategic Planning and Environment Officer's report planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. C01 Statutory Time Limit

2. C2N Drainage details

3. Details submitted in discharge of condition 2 shall incorporate ground permeability tests to determine if ground conditions are suitable for the use of soakaways. Reason: To ensure an orderly form of development

4. No member of the public shall be admitted to or allowed to remain on the premises between the hours of 23:00 and 07:00 on any day. Reason: To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected.

5. There shall be no arrival, departure, loading or unloading of delivery vehicles between the hours of 20:00 and 06:00. Reason: To ensure that the amenity of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity are protected.

6. D7Z Contaminated materials

7. E7Z Imported Aggregates

8. E7S Details of Refuse Storage

9. C5A Construction of Site Enclosure

10. E1B Samples of Materials

11. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Development) Order 1995 (or any Order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order) or the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992 (or any statutory instrument amending or revoking and re-enacting those Regulations) the ground floor window(s) of the premises shall allow an open and unrestricted view of a window display(s) or the trading area(s) within the premises and the window(s) shall not be painted, covered over or otherwise obscured without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to promote natural surveillance.

12. F4A Landscaping Scheme

13. All planting, seeding, turfing or paved areas comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the occupation of the building or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, or are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the local planning authority gives written consent to any variation. Reason: To maintain and improve the appearance of the area in the interests of visual amenity.

14. C3S Cycle Parking

15. D3D Maintenance of Parking Within Site

16. Unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the highway works illustrated within drawing numbers 101 Rev D and 1717-03 Rev C received on 30th September 2010 shall be carried out prior to the beneficial use of the development hereby approved. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic passing along the highway.

17. Prior to the commencement of development details of the proposed lighting and CCTV for the store and car park shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved lighting and CCTV scheme shall be implemented prior to beneficial use

67 of the development and thereafter maintained. Reason: In the interests of security and crime prevention and to ensure an orderly form of development.

18. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered Drawing No’s 101 Rev D, 102 RevC, 104 Rev B, 1717-03 Rev C attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application.

19. The convenience store hereby approved shall not be serviced by any vehicle measuring greater than 11 metres in length at any time. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic passing along the highway and pedestrian safety.

RECOMMENDATION 2 : To protect the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity attention is drawn to the provisions of Section 60 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in relation to the control of noise from demolition and construction activities. Further to this the applicant is advised that no noise audible outside the site boundary adjacent to the curtilage of residential property shall be created by construction activities in respect of the implementation of this consent outside the hours of 0800-1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 - 1300 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sunday or public holidays. The applicant is also advised to seek approval for any proposed piling operations.

RECOMMENDATION 3: The applicant is advised to contact the South Wales Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor (029 2057 1501) to discuss appropriate levels of external lighting and CCTV to be installed within the car park serving the convenience store.

RECOMMENDATION 4: The applicant is advised to secure the consent of the Operational Manager, Street Operations (John Haines, Brindley Road) prior to undertaking any works within the adopted highway.

RECOMMENDATION 5 - Bats often roost in houses and other buildings, and work on these buildings may disturb a bat roost. All bats and their roosts are protected against disturbance under UK and European legislation. If works are planned on a building in which bats are roosting, the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) must be contacted for advice.

If work has already commenced and bats are found, or if any evidence that bats are using the site as a roost is found, work should cease and CCW should be contacted immediately.

Where bats are known to occur, no works of site clearance, demolition or construction should take place until a licence to disturb these species has been granted in accordance with the relevant legislation.

The Cardiff office of CCW can For further advice on bats

68 be contacted at:- please contact:-

Unit 7, Castleton Court, The Bat Conservation Trust, Fortran Road, Unit 2, 15 Cloisters House, St Mellon's, 8 Battersea Park Road, Cardiff CF3 0LT. London SW8 4BG. Tel: 02920 772400 Tel: 020 7627 2629 Fax: 02920 772412 Fax: 020 7627 2628

These comments contribute to this Authority’s discharge of its duties under Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, wherein: (1) Every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity. (3) Conserving biodiversity includes, in relation to a living organism or type of habitat, restoring or enhancing a population or habitat.

1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the Carpenter Arms Public House and construction of a single storey building to be used as a convenience store (Use Class A1) with servicing area and car park.

1.2 The proposed unit will have a floor area of 450 square metres and will be sited on a similar footprint to the existing public house, adjacent to the footpath along Newport Road and in line with No’s 747 and 749 Newport Road to the west of the site.

1.3 The unit will measure 20.5 metres long along the frontage of Newport Road and extend a maximum of 28 metres into the site. It will measure 3.7 metres to eaves with a pitched roof. Its maximum height would be 6.2m to the front and lowering to 5.6 metres when the store extends into the site. It will be constructed with facing brick work and concrete roof tiles with elements of glazing to the front and side (east) elevations.

1.4 Following concerns raised by Planning Committee on 15th September 2010 regarding the surveillance of the rear car park, the rear elevation of the store has been amended to incorporate three additional windows. These windows will allow staff using the rear backup/storage area to overlook the rear car park.

1.5 The existing access from Newport Road will be widened to provide vehicular access for both customers and service vehicles to the car park and service area to the rear of the store. The existing car park will be retained and following concerns raised by Planning Committee on their site visit undertaken on 6th September 2010 and the debate that took place at Planning Committee on 15th September 2010 the car park has been amended so that it will provide spaces for 20 cars, one of which will be for disabled customers. It was originally proposed to provide only 13 spaces. The existing vehicular entrance to the site from Widecombe Drive will be closed.

1.6 Following concerns raised by Planning Committee on 15th September 2010 additional pedestrian safety measures are now proposed at the vehicular and pedestrian access to the store. A barrier will be installed outside of the entrance to the store to stop pedestrians from walking straight out onto the new access. In addition, a new tabled pedestrian crossing will be provided across the access road which will give priority to pedestrians who wish to cross from the entrance to the store to the shopping parade located to the east of the site.

1.7 The application has been accompanied by vehicular tracking movement diagrams which illustrate that service vehicles up to 12.6m in length can enter and exit the site in forward gear.

1.8 The application has been accompanied by a noise measurement report and bat survey.

1.9 It is noted that the applicants are RJS Building Contractors. However, the elevation plans indicate that the store is proposed as a Sainsbury’s Local retail store.

1.10 Following concerns raised at the Planning Committee site visit undertaken on 6th September 2010, an amended plan has been received which illustrates that an area to the west of the site, adjacent to the existing blocked access with Widecombe Drive is also under the control of the applicant In addition, the applicant confirms: • The applicant has confirmed that the area of land highlighted in blue will be fenced off to prevent any fly tipping. The applicant intends to develop this land in the future and will submit a planning application in due coarse. • The Carpenter Arms has a right of way over the access road to the east of the pub which is also used by the Post Office which also benefits from the same right of way. • The car park which will serve the proposed store has been designed so that all types of service vehicles can access the store. However, it is intended that 11m rigid chasses and 10.7m articulated trucks will be used. • The applicant notes that it will be policy for the proposed tenant to recruit staff locally, so travel on foot or public transport is more likely than private car. The proposed car park will be available to all visitors to the shopping centre for short term parking. Long term parking will not be permitted and will be enforced if the facility is abused. • The car park to the Carpenter Arms has never been owned by the Council • No public rights of way exist across the land, either implied or established. • The Widecombe Drive entry has been closed off by a locked barrier to avoid nuisance to neighbours.

1.11 In addition to the above, the applicant has submitted a revised Design and Access Statement in order to address the concerns Planning Committee raised on 15th September 2010 regarding the scale and appearance of the proposed store. The applicant suggests: • The locality is characterised by a mix of building sizes and styles ranging from

70 a 10 year old single storey square building to the south west of Widecombe Drive (Blockbuster) to semi detached properties immediately to the west of the application site which front Newport Road to the terrace of mid 20th century retail units set back from Newport Road to the east. • The existing public house is older than its neighbours and in poor condition. Whilst two storey, it is lower than the properties either side of it. • The proposed building is designed to operate more efficiently and economically than the existing structure. Overall its scale and massing is similar to the existing Public House, being single storey with a pitched roof. The building line is moved further back into the plot to provide a more generous pavement width. • External materials are similar to the most recently constructed building occupied by Blockbuster. • There is an absence of any strong uniform character of building in this locality and the proposal provides a quality modern building in keeping with its surroundings.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 The application site is a vacant two storey/single storey public house measuring 525 square metres with a large car park to the rear with vehicular access from Newport Road to the front and Widecombe Drive to the rear (west). The public house would appear to be older than the surrounding properties and in poor condition. It is not a listed building. The public house has a lean-to and flat roof single storey extensions to the rear.

2.2 The application site is sited in the western part of the Rumney Local Centre adjacent to a parade of retail shops. These retail shops are accessed via a service road off Newport Road. To the rear and west of the application site are residential properties in Widecombe Drive and Cranleigh Rise.

3. SITE HISTORY

3.1 Planning Permission 06/2437/E – Form new front entrance and timber decking area to rear with alterations to access, new glazed roof light to rear at the Carpenter Arms PH – Approved December 2006

3.2 Advertisement Application A04/151/E – Refurbishment of existing signs and poster holders – Approved August 2004

4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 National Policy Planning Policy Wales (March 2002) Technical Advice Note (TAN) 11: Noise Technical Advice Note (TAN) 12: Design Technical Advice Note (TAN) 15: Development and Flood Risk Technical Advice Note (TAN) 18: Transport Technical Advice Note (TAN) 21: Waste Outline Regional (South East Wales) Transport Plan (January 2007)

4.2 Local Planning Policy The South Glamorgan (Cardiff Area) Replacement Structure Plan

City of Cardiff Local Plan (1995) policies: 11: Design and aesthetic quality 14: Facilities for public transport services 16: Traffic calming 17: Parking and servicing facilities 18: Provision for cyclists 19: Provision for pedestrians 20: Provision for special needs groups 49: Local and District Centres 50: Retail development

Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (2003) policies 2.20: Good Design 2.34: Retail development 2.57: Access, circulation and parking requirements 2.58: Impact on transport networks 2.64: Air, noise and light pollution

Supplementary Planning Guidance Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements (June 2006) Waste Collection and Storage Facilities (March 2007)

5. INTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES

5.1 The Operational Manager (Transportation) notes the concerns that have been expressed by residents and local traders in regards to increased traffic generation. However, he considers that the proposed store will operate satisfactorily in practice.

He notes that in accordance with the Trip Rate Information Computer System (TRICS) database an increase of some 625 twenty four hour two way vehicle movements may be anticipated compared with 235 such movements associated with the existing public house access. However, the applicant has proposed that the existing uncontrolled, sub-standard public house access will be widened to allow 2-way passage of vehicles. This work will also include the improvement to the existing site access to incorporate improvements to pedestrian facilities (in terms of dropped kerbs, tactile paving, pedestrian crossing and safety barriers/bollards) at both the existing and service road accesses, as well as the re-surfacing of the section of the Newport Road footway fronting the site.

In addition he notes that the development needs to be seen in the context of the adjacent Rumney Local Centre. The service road fronting the local centre, which is accessed off Newport Road, is one-way only with entry off Newport Road and egress via British Legion Drive, and is considered unsatisfactory. This service road is usually heavily parked resulting in congestion and

72 difficulty in achieving access, for right turning vehicles in particular, with vehicles often being obliged to wait on Newport Road. The applicant has stated that the parking area at the rear of the proposed store will not be exclusively used for customers using the new convenience store and could be used on a short term basis for customers visiting the Local Centre, thereby providing a significant benefit in terms of alleviating the existing problems. In terms of context, the Operational Manager (Transportation) also notes that it may be useful to consider that, in terms of scale, the proposed store is less than a third of the overall size of the adjacent parade of shops and the proposed level of parking is acceptable.

The Operational Manager (Transportation) notes that the amended plans concerning the vehicular access to the store and additional pedestrian safety measures proposed would serve to ensure low vehicle speeds as they enter and leave the store car park, and would also provide a wider benefit in terms of assisting the passage of pedestrians with prams and wheelchairs. He advises that conditions precluding beneficial occupation prior to the implementation of the widening of the existing site access to 5.5 metres together with the associated highway improvement works to the access should be attached to any planning permission. A second recommendation advising the applicant of the need to secure the consent of the Operational Manager, Street Operations (John Haines, Brindley Road) prior to undertaking any works within the adopted highway in this respect.

The Operational Manager (Transportation) notes that adequate parking (including provision for cyclists) is provided together with adequate provision for the movement of delivery vehicles. He deems a condition is necessary to ensure the provision of a system of street lighting to ensure the safety of customers using the parking area after dark. A further condition should also stipulate the provision and future maintenance of 6 cycle stands for use by customers and staff.

In line with current policy aimed at promoting non car-borne modes of travel the Operational Manager (Transportation) also advises the need for a contribution towards public transport enhancement. A contribution of £10,400, secured by means of a Section 106 agreement, to be utilised to effect improvements to existing bus stop facilities in the vicinity of the site, would be an acceptable contribution in order to mitigate against the impact of the development.

5.2 The Strategic Planning Manager (Land Use Policy) makes the following comments:

“The application is located within the Rumney Local Centre as defined by the City of Cardiff Local Plan (1996). The application will therefore need to be assessed against Policy 49 of the Local Plan. This policy seeks to maintain and enhance the vitality, attractiveness and viability of the defined district and local centres.

Currently the Carpenters Arms is a vacant pub that does not contribute

73 anything to the vitality and viability of the centre. A new A1 retail unit would be supported by Policy 49 as it will serve to enhance the predominant shopping role and character of the existing centre.

This application raises no policy concerns.”

5.3 The Strategic Planning Manager (Urban Design) makes the following comments:

“The proposed supermarket building is set marginally further back from the street than that of the existing public house. The front elevation of the building would subsequently follow the building line created by the semi detached dwellings located to the west of the site, in doing so strengthening the building line in this part of the street. The small set back would also enable a small increase in the area of public realm to the front of the proposed building creating a more pedestrian friendly and focused environment.

The application site is set in an area of Newport Road with a mix of both commercial and residential premises and which range in height, bulk architectural style, materials and general character. The application seeks the construction of a single storey building with a pitched roof. The proposed backup/storage area within the development encroaches further back in to the site than the dwellings to the west do into their respective back gardens. However given the single storey nature of the proposal, the presence of the vehicular access between the proposed development and the dwellings, and that the building would sit fractionally further away from the dwellings than the existing public house does, all contribute to minimising the effect the scheme would have upon the neighbouring properties. The positioning, scale, height and massing would as such be considered acceptable in design terms.

The inclusion of large areas of glazing on the southern and eastern elevations of the scheme would enable high levels of surveillance to be provided over both Newport Road and the parade of shops located to the east while also increasing the relationship between the proposal and its surroundings especially along Newport Road. It would as such be important that the glazing be maintained for these purposes.

While the positioning of merchandising and internal advertising within window displays can provide a significant degree of visual interest within the street scene it is important that the any such use does not reduce levels of surveillance provided over the street to an unreasonable degree.

Provision of an element of glazing in the store room / rear elevation of the building overlooking the car park would benefit the scheme through providing a level of perceived surveillance from the building over the space. It would also provide an element of aesthetic interest to an otherwise blank and negative elevation.

The proposed entrance/exit for the store is located on the eastern elevation of the building creating a strong relationship between the scheme and the

74 parade of shops to the east. Access to the store should subsequently be level between the store and other shops within the parade further integrating the scheme with it surroundings and allowing ease of access for all. Some concern is had as to potential conflict which might result between pedestrians accessing the store and vehicles wishing to enter or exit the store car park.

The customer car park proposed is located to the rear of the building as was the case for the public house. High quality, appropriate and secure boundary treatments around the car park are sought in order to provide increased security within the vicinity of the scheme and protect the residential amenity for the neighbouring occupiers. Little natural surveillance would be provided over the car park due to its positioning and as such it would be imperative that security measures, such as surveillance cameras are put in place in order to reduce the potential risk of crime and disorder occurring within the facility.

Vehicular access to the car park area would be shared with servicing vehicles for the store. This coupled with the limited space within the site for servicing vehicles to manoeuvre would likely create potential conflict. Access onto the site from Newport Road might also be problematic due to the wide and busy nature of the road.

Bike stands with the capacity to accommodate up to 6 bikes are proposed within the scheme. The positioning of the stands are however of some concern due to their location being partially hidden behind the main building and out of sight from the main street scene. Provision of some means of increased security would as a consequence be beneficial. The provision of a window in the northern elevation of the building overlooking the stands or provision of a security camera focusing upon the area should be considered.”

5.4 The Strategic Planning Manager (Ecology) has no objection subject to recommendation 5.

5.5 The Operational Manager (Drainage) has no objection subject to conditions 2 and 3.

5.6 The Operational Manager (Waste Management) notes that the refuse storage details are acceptable but should be made secure. Accordingly condition 8 is deemed necessary.

5.7 The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) has no objection subject to recommendations 2 and 3 and conditions 4, 5, 6 and 7.

6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES

6.1 Welsh Water has no objection to the proposal subject to condition 2.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 Neighbours have been consulted and letters of objection have been received from the occupiers of 711A, 753C, 755, 761, 765, 765A, 769, 777-779 and

75 777A Newport Road, 183 Burnham Avenue, Flat 2 Cheriton Court, Cranleigh Rise and the Campaign for Real Ale Cardiff Branch. The objections relate to the following issues:

• There are already significant levels of traffic congestion along Newport Road near to the site and along the entrance to the car park to the north and parade of shops to the east. The proposal will further increase traffic levels in the vicinity. The proposed vehicular entrance will be used by both customers and service vehicles causing more congestion. • Parking is also very limited for the users of the proposed store and those shops along Newport Road within the Rumney Local Centre. • The proposed opening time of 23:00 hours and ability to sell alcohol will lead to nuisance caused by noise of customers and anti social behaviour due to youths and other customers congregating near to the proposed store. This is made worse by the fact the store is near to other public houses which also serve alcohol till 23.00 hours. • The enclosure to the site needs to be made more secure particularly along its northern boundary with the flats along Cranleigh Rise. • The proposal will have a detrimental effect on the local independent economy, which will struggle to compete on both price and convenience with big supermarkets economies of scale. There is no requirement for an additional convenience store. • The proposed supermarket will kill community life within the Local Centre and result in the closure of other shops in the vicinity. • The demolition of the public house will result in the loss of an old established public and social amenity and facility to the detriment of local residents. The loss of a public house results in the loss of a safe and controlled drinking environment and its possible replacement with a premises allowing off-sales with an increased possibility of social harm. • The public house is of historical importance being one of the oldest licensed premises in Cardiff. • A copy of the application should have been sent to the neighbouring shops within the Rumney Local Centre.

7.2 A petition of approximately 450 signatures has been received objecting to the proposal for the following reasons:

• The convenience store will increase traffic levels, conjunction on Newport Road and put pedestrians in danger caused by the entrance to the proposed convenience store. • With late opening hours (07:00 – 23.00) and the sale of alcohol, noise pollution, loitering, anti social behaviour is a great concern for local residents especially those living above the shops and nearby streets. • The detrimental effect which it will have on the local businesses on the parade. This will surely run businesses to the ground losing the individual character and vibrancy in the surrounding area.

7.3 Local Members of both Rumney and Llanrumney Wards have been consulted and Councillor Heather Joyce requested that Planning Committee undertake

76 an inspection of the site.

7.4 Cllr Ireland has sent copies of correspondence sent to the Council’s Traffic Management Service regarding his concerns about the traffic problems on Newport Road near to the application site prior to the submission of this application. Cllr Ireland suggests that there have been several accidents with cars trying to access the right turn into the Carpenter Arms car park. Also several cars undertaking U turns around the crossing outside the Carpenter Arms, all causing dangerous situations especially since double yellow lines on the opposite site of the road results in illegal parking. He also comments that there have been several unrecorded accidents (minor in nature).

7.5 In response to Cllr Ireland’s letters, the Operational Manager (Traffic Management) responded that: • Only a small number of vehicles made the illegal U-turn manoeuvres in comparison to overall traffic flow. • Following analysis of the police casualty record database the Operational Manager (Traffic Management) advised that the area is operating safely in respect of the issues raised. • He suggests that there is no justification for the provision of further restrictions on this section of Newport Road and advises that there would be benefit in the improvement to the access arrangement to the Carpenter Arms. He notes that as this is private land, these improvements can only be made as part of the possible redevelopment of the site.

(These comments were made by the Operational Manager (Traffic Management) prior to the submission of this application).

7.6 Alun Michael MP has written to the Chairman of Planning Committee objecting to the proposal for the following reasons: i. As someone who uses Newport Road regularly he finds the concept of traffic entering and leaving the site of the Carpenter Arms Public House quite horrific. The traffic at that junction is heavy at all times of the day and night and because of south turning traffic visibility is split across 3 lanes and is often problematic.

ii. He asked the South Wales Police about the likely impact on traffic safety in this area and received a response from Chief Superintendent Bob Tooby (which will also be reported as a late representation). Alun Michael believes that the speeding and parking problems in the area can only be exacerbated if the proposed development goes ahead, rather than helping to reduce the problems.

iii. He also asks Planning Committee to note his concern about the sale of cheap alcohol in the area.

iv. Furthermore, he notes that he has been approached by local shopkeepers, dismayed by the additional pressure that would come upon them as a consequence of the proposed change of use. That has

77 made him look afresh at the arrangements in that area of Newport Road which has strengthened his view that the proposed development would be inappropriate and dangerous and he hopes it will be refused.

7.7 Alum Michael MP has also forwarded a copy of a letter he received from Bob Tooby, Chief Superintendent, South Wales Police Eastern BCU in a response to concerns Mr Michael raised to South Wales Police regarding this application. In his letter Chief Superintendent Tooby notes that ‘He does support Mr Michael’s MP concern regarding traffic on this very busy road and he would be reluctant to add to this. Local residents have been constantly campaigning to reduce the speeding and parking problems. He is not sorry to see the pub go as they did have several incidents there over the years. It would be difficult to analyse data around parking but no-one would deny how busy it is already. He has a second concern with cheap alcohol being sold in the area but notes that the Police have been unsuccessful convincing the authorities of this problem at other locations across the city.”

7.8 The application was also advertised by way of a site notice which expired on 2nd July 2010.

8. ANALYSIS

8.1 This planning application was deferred at Planning Committee on 11th August, 2010, for a Committee site visit which took place on 6th September 2010. The application was subsequently considered by Planning Committee on 15th September 2010 where it was resolved to defer the application to allow the Chief Strategic Planning and Environment Officer to report back to Committee potential reasons for refusal (see para 8.17).

8.2 The key issues are the effect of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the area, living conditions of neighbours and highway safety/parking.

8.3 The Strategic Planning Manager (Land Use Policy) has considered the proposal in regards to national and local planning policy and raises no policy concerns. The Strategic Planning Manager (Land Use Policy) notes that the application site is currently vacant and does not contribute to the vitality and viability of the Rumney Local Centre. A new Use Class A1 retail unit would be supported by Policy 49 of the Cardiff Local Plan as it will serve to enhance the predominant shopping role and character of the existing local centre.

8.4 The demolition of the public house is considered acceptable. The Carpenters Arms is not a listed building nor considered to be of any historical importance. The surrounding area is not a conservation area and therefore it is considered the demolition of this vacant premise will not prejudice the character of the area. Furthermore, the Strategic Planning Manager (Ecology) has raised no objection to the proposal in regards to the current ecological conditions present at the vacant public house and notes from the submitted bat report, that there is no evidence of bats roosting at the premises. However, he advises recommendation 6.

8.5 The key consideration is the design of the proposed building and how this would impact on the character and appearance of the area. The comprehensive response of the Strategic Planning Manager (Urban Design) on this issue is in paragraph 5.3 of this report. As noted, the Strategic Planning Manager (Urban Design) consideres that the proposed building is considered acceptable in regards to its positioning, scale, height and massing in design terms. The proposal is considered to be of a similar scale to the existing public house and the other premises in the vicinity and respects the existing building line along this section of Newport Road. It is also noted that this area of Newport Road has a mix of different building types and styles ranging from the single storey Blockbuster store to the west of Widecombe Drive to the two storey retail units set well back off Newport Road to the east of the site. The design of the proposed store also allows for an increase in the area of public realm to the front of the proposed building which will create a more pedestrian friendly and focused environment. Furthermore it is considered by the Strategic Planning Manager (Urban Design) that the proposed unit creates a strong link to the existing parade of shops to the east. Condition 10 will ensure that samples of materials are submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in order to ensure a satisfactory finish to the development. Condition 11 will ensure the large elements of glazing proposed which are considered to have a beneficiary effect upon the natural surveillance of the area are not covered by advertisements. This will include the additional windows which are now to be installed within the rear elevation of the store overlooking the car park.

8.6 The Strategic Planning Manager (Urban Design) suggests that high quality, appropriate and secure boundary enclosures should be provided to the rear car park. Condition 9 is therefore deemed necessary which will require such details to be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. In addition condition 17 will require external lighting and CCTV to be provided within the car park of the proposed store which will aid crime prevention. It is noted that both the Strategic Planning Manager (Urban Design) and Planning Committee on 15th September 2010 had concerns regarding the lack of natural surveillance over the car park which may lead to increased incidences of crime and anti-social behaviour. Amended plans have now been received which includes three windows within the rear elevation which will overlook the car park. In addition to these additional windows, condition 17 will ensure that this section of the car park is well lit and surveyed by CCTV, which will overcome the concerns of the Strategic Planning Manager (Urban Design).

8.7 In regards to the impact of the proposal upon the residential amenity of neighbours, it is noted that the proposed backup/storage area within the development encroaches further back into the site than the dwellings to the west. However given the single storey scale of the proposal, its relationship with neighbours is considered reasonable. In regards to the nearest property to the west at 749 Newport Road it is noted that the single storey building will be fractionally further away from this neighbour than the existing two storey public house and where the single storey rear section of the development

79 projects past the rear elevation of 749 Newport Road it will be sited a minimum of 2.5 metres and a maximum of 5 metres from this boundary. The dwellings to the north are approximately 23 metres from the development and the residential accommodation to the east is at first floor level above the shops. All proposed windows are at ground floor level and will not prejudice the privacy of neighbours. A door is proposed within the south western elevation facing 749 Newport Road; however, condition 9 will ensure a solid means of enclosure is erected along this boundary to maintain the privacy of neighbours to the west whilst providing a privacy screen to neighbours to the north from users of the car park. Accordingly, the privacy of neighbouring residential occupiers is not prejudiced. These views are shared by the Strategic Planning Manager (Urban Design).

8.8 A number of objections were received in regards to the proposed opening times of the store, along with a petition referring to this issue. The Operational Manager, Environment (Pollution Control) was made aware of these concerns. However, he raised no objection to the proposal subject to conditions 4 and 5 which will limit opening and delivery times in order to protect the residential amenity of neighbouring occupiers. In his response he notes that he does not consider that the proposal would be of any more of a nuisance than the existing public house, which would be allowed to open till at least 23.00 hours and to provide regulated entertainment. It should be noted that the proposed store, if constructed, would have to apply to the Council separately for a licence to sell alcohol. Furthermore, any antisocial behaviour would have to be reported to the Police or the relevant services of the Council.

8.9 The Operational Manager (Transportation) has been made aware of the concerns of local residents and members in regards to highway congestion, car parking and pedestrian safety and his full response is in paragraph 5.1 of this report. The Operational Manager (Transportation) notes that the scheme has been amended so that an addition 7 car parking spaces are now proposed (20 in total), the existing access will be widened to 5.5 metres in width to allow two cars to pass side by side and additional pedestrian safety measures are now proposed in order to stop pedestrians from walking out onto the highway from the store entrance and to give pedestrians priority when crossing the new vehicular access road.

8.10 The Operational Manager (Transportation) notes that the application site is located on a busy main road and the proposed retail use would inevitably involve an increase in vehicular traffic from/onto Newport Road. The site is also located adjacent to a parade of shops which is accessed via a narrow and heavily used service road which is currently unsatisfactory. However, following careful consideration of the proposal and meetings between the Operational Manager (Transportation) and highway consultants acting on behalf of the applicants, the Operational Manager (Transportation) has no objection to the amended scheme. This is subject to conditions regarding the widening of the existing access and implementation of works to the junction of Newport Road which will allow for a two way passage of vehicles and improve pedestrian facilities to the store’s access to include a pedestrian crossing and

80 safety barriers and bollards. In addition, it is noted that the revised level of car parking and its layout (which includes sufficient space for the manoeuvring of service vehicles measuring 12.6m in length) is considered acceptable having regard to the Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements: SPG. Furthermore, the Operational Manager (Transportation) is satisfied that following the implementation of the works to the access, service vehicles can adequately access the site. Conditions are deemed necessary to ensure that the vehicle and cycle parking is provided and maintained, the parking area consists of a hard surface, CCTV and external lighting is provided, and the proposed access and pedestrian safety works are carried out prior to the beneficial occupation of the development.

8.11 Tracking diagrams have been submitted by the applicant which illustrates that there is adequate room within the site for service vehicles up to 12.6m in length to enter and exit in forward gear. However, they note that vehicles proposed to service the store will be a maximum of 11 metres in length and the applicant will accept a condition restricting the service vehicles to these types (condition 19).

8.12 In addition to these conditions, the Operational Manager (Transportation) suggests that in order to promote non-car borne travel to the development, a financial contribution of £10,400 is required, in line with local planning policy. This contribution could be sought by way of an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The applicant has confirmed his acceptance of this contribution. This financial contribution can be put towards improvements to bus stop facilities in the vicinity of the site.

8.13 Further to a suggestion from the Operational Manager (Transportation) that the car park of the proposed convenience store could be used also for customers of the local centre, the applicant has confirmed that the car park will not be used exclusively for the customers of the proposed convenience store. This would allow customers visiting other premises within the local centre to park within this store on a short term, informal basis. This is similar to how the existing car park of the public house is used at present.

8.14 The Strategic Planning Manager (Urban Design) did have concerns that the east facing store entrance may cause conflict between pedestrians accessing the store and vehicles wishing to enter or exit. These concerns were also expressed by Planning Committee on 15th September 2010. Amended plans have now been submitted which address this issue. A raised pedestrian crossing will be provided from the entrance of the store to the parade of shops to the east of the site. In addition a barrier will be sited at the proposed stores entrance stopping pedestrians from walking out onto the access road and directing them to the pedestrian crossing. Additional safety bollards will be installed at the junction of the new store and Newport Road to stop vehicles mounting the kerb. The Operational Manager (Transportation) consider the amended proposal acceptable in regards to pedestrian safety especially having regard to the proposed works to the access to the site which will include other benefits to the pedestrian area such as dropped kerbs and tactile paving.

8.15 In regards to the comments made by Cllr Ireland it should be noted that the majority of the accidents referred to by the Operational Manager (Traffic Management) appear to relate to the existing sub standard access to the existing car park within the application site. This access will be significantly widened to allow the passage of two vehicles side by side and a greater visibility splay. In addition, a new pedestrian crossing will be provided across the access to the new store along with other pedestrian safety measures detailed above.

8.16 Conditions regarding the drainage of the site and refuse storage are considered necessary to ensure an orderly form of development. In addition a condition requiring landscaping provision is necessary to ensure the satisfactory finish to the public realm. There are elements within the car park and to the front of the store which could benefit from soft landscaping and shrub planting.

8.17 In regards to the comments made by adjoining neighbours, which are not covered above the following points should be considered:

• The economic impact of the proposal upon the neighbouring businesses of the Rumney Local Centre as a whole is not a material planning consideration. In addition, whether there is a demand for such a convenience store is also not a material planning consideration. Market forces appear to suggest that there is no requirement for this public house as it is currently vacant. In addition, it is noted that this is not the only public house within the local centre. • It should be noted that planning permission would not be required to change the use of the public house to a convenience store (Use class A1). • The application was publicised in accordance with requirements of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995. 42 adjoining land owners were notified in writing of the application. In addition, the application has been publicised by means of a site notice erected along Newport Road to the front of the application site. It is considered that this level of publicity was satisfactory, particularly having regard to the large response received from the public. • The applicant has confirmed that the area of land highlighted in blue adjacent to Widecombe Drive will be securely enclosed to stop fly tipping. Condition 9 will ensure that this is the case.

8.18 Planning permission is recommended, subject to conditions and to the completion of a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

8.19 Following the resolution of Planning Committee on 15th September 2010, the following potential reasons for refusal are put forward:

1. The proposal, as a result of its scale and un-sympathetic appearance along Newport Road, would be likely to result in a incongruous form of development

82 on this prominent site, and detract from the character and visual amenities of the area, contrary to Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality) of the City of Cardiff Local Plan (adopted January 1996), Policy 2.20 (Good Design) of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) and the advice contained in Planning Policy Wales March 2002.

2. The access arrangements for the convenience store would give rise to a conflict between pedestrians and vehicles and as such be detrimental to pedestrian safety, contrary to Policy 17 (Parking and Servicing Facilities) of the City of Cardiff Local Plan (adopted January 1996), and Policy 2.57 (Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements) of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003).

3. The car park, which would not be directly overlook from within the store, would result in the potential for crime and antisocial behaviour, contrary to the advice contained in Welsh Office Circular 16/94 'Planning Out Crime'.

83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91

LOCAL MEMBERS COMMENTS

COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/01044/E APPLICATION DATE: 08/06/2010

ED: LLANRUMNEY

APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission

APPLICANT: Mrs Karen Feneck LOCATION: 32 TAUNTON CRESCENT, LLANRUMNEY, CARDIFF, CF3 4EP PROPOSAL: ROOF EXTENSION FROM HIP TO GABLE REAR DORMER SINGLE STOREY FRONT SIDE AND REAR EXTENSION

______

RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following condition(s):

1. C01 Statutory Time Limit

2. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plan no. 20-200C received on 25th August, 2010 attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application.

3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order) no windows shall be inserted in the side elevations facing 30 and 34 Taunton Crescent, other than those hereby approved. Reason : To ensure that the privacy of adjoining occupiers is protected.

4. The second floor window facing 34 Taunton Crescent on the shall be non opening below a height of 1.8 metres above internal floor level and glazed with obscure glass and thereafter be so maintained. Reason : To ensure that the privacy of adjoining occupiers is protected.

5. The garage hereby permitted shall be used only for purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house as such and for no other purpose whatsoever. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining properties are protected.

6. A solid screen fence 1.8 metres high shall be retained at all times along the site boundary with 6 Bideford Road, adjacent to the extension

92 hereby approved. Reason: To ensure that the privacy of adjoining occupiers is protected.

7. RECOMMENDATION 2: That the applicant be advised that all development including fascias, rainwater goods and footings shall take place solely on the applicants land and shall not encroach onto adjoining land.

1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 This full application is for the construction of a hip to gable roof extension, rear dormer extension and a single storey front, side and rear extension to 32 Taunton Crescent.

1.2 The proposed rear dormer (as amended) will be 5.7m wide, 2.1m high with a flat roof and 3.1m projection.

1.3 The single storey extension (as amended) will be 4-8.2m wide, 2.2-12.3m long and 3.4m high with a hipped roof and will incorporate a garage to the frontage, with an up and over door. The garage will not be large enough to accommodate cars but it is intended to provide storage for motorcycles.

1.4 The hip to gable roof extension is 4.2 m wide, 7.6 m long and 2.7 m high and incorporates roof lights on the front elevation.

2. SITE

2.1 The application site comprises a two-storey semi-detached dwelling with a single storey annexe within a residential area.

3. SITE HISTORY

3.1 None

4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 The application site is shown as part of an existing housing area as defined on the Proposals Map of the City of Cardiff Local Plan. Relevant policies of the Local Plan Include:

Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality)

4.2 The following policies of the Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) are considered to be relevant to the proposal:

Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity)

4.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance: Householder Design Guide (March 07)

93 4.4 Technical Advice Note 12: Design (2009)

5. INTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES

5.1 Operational Manager, Transportation has no objections.

6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES

6.1 None

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 Letters have been received from the occupiers of the neighbouring dwellings at 26, 28, 30, 34 and 36 Taunton Crescent, 168 and 176 Llanrumney Avenue, 21 Ilfracombe Crescent, 6 Bideford Road, 1 Heathcliffe Close and 16 Fremington Place, objecting to the proposal (including the amended plans) for the following reasons:

i) loss of privacy, ii) single storey extension is too large and would destroy character of building, iii) design of dormer and roof extension not in keeping with surrounding area, iv) proposal conflicts with Unitary Development Plan policy 2.20 and Technical Advice Note 12, v) would set a precedent for other similar developments, vi) loss of light/sunlight, vii) loss of view, viii) noise/construction noise, ix) scale and massing of proposal is not in keeping with area, x) would result in a three-storey dwelling, xi) roof-lights on front elevation are at odds with appearance of dwelling and not symmetrically placed, xii) materials not in keeping with existing dwelling, xiii) parking problems, xiv) loss of value to neighbouring dwellings, xv) garage element would not be in keeping with character of street, being totally out of proportion and significantly different in appearance from any other in the area.

7.2 A 58 name petition has also been submitted, objecting to the proposal for the following reasons:

(i) overdevelopment of the property, (ii) proposal is not in keeping with surrounding area, (iii) dormer would conflict with UDP plan policy on Good Design and TAN12, (iv) the rear and side extension is too long and large, (v) the garage has a shutter door which is not in keeping with area.

94 7.3 Further letters and e-mails have been received from the occupiers of 21 Ilfracombe Crescent, 30 and 34 Taunton Crescent, objecting to the amended scheme for the following reasons:

i) they wish their previous objections to be reported, ii) they requested a site visit, iii) they were not consulted by the applicant prior to submission of the application, iv) the size of the proposal, v) the report shows a lack of appreciation in regards to the design of the hip to gable roof extension, which would in their opinion be incongruous with rest of building and will prejudice the symmetry character and appearance of the street-scene, vi) The dormer extension would mean a three-storey house. The materials will not be in keeping with the existing dwelling and the dormer window is too large. They are concerned that the proposed dormer will have a significant impact upon privacy of gardens opposite and front gardens and houses in the adjacent street. Although overlooking is a normal feature in the area, the dormer extension would ‘bring depth’ to that overlooking, vii) concerned that addresses of objectors have appeared on Committee report and the internet, viii) One neighbour is concerned at the lax way in which the planning service is dealing with correspondence with herself and other neighbours, ix) they have had to call the police in a number of times regarding the behaviour of the applicant, x) people applying for planning permission should be made to sign that they understand the due process, xi) they would like details of the complaints procedure as they feel that the application has been dealt with unprofessionally, xii) a number of late representations have been sent in which should be considered, xiii) they state that ‘respecting local character’ is important to any good design and in their opinion the proposal does not do that. They say that a good design will bring a street together and give residents a sense of pride. They are of the opinion that if the development was approved, it would mean that the street would be known as “that was a lovely street before the development of that odd shaped overbearing house”, xiv) One neighbours refers to a meeting a few years ago with former Councillor Gill Bird, who (apparently) stated that Taunton Crescent is one of, if not the best street in Llanrumney. Committee should take this into account. If the development is approved, this lovely street would lose its character.

7.4 Councillor H Joyce requested a site visit, due to concerns regarding proximity of extensions, loss of light and amenity.

8. ANALYSIS

8.1 This planning application was deferred at Planning Committee on 15th September 2010, for a Committee site visit, which took place on 4th October 2010

8.2 The proposal relates to the erection of a hip to gable roof extension, rear dormer extension and a single storey front, side and rear extension.

8.3 The main planning issues relate to: (i) the design and appearance of the roof extension, dormer and single storey extension and their likely visual impact on the street scene; and (ii) the impact on the privacy and amenities of neighbouring occupiers.

8.4 With respect to the visual impact of the dormer extension (as amended) on the appearance of the house and surrounding area, advice is provided in the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance: Householder Design Guide, approved in March 2007. The SPG states that the design of dormer windows should be carefully considered as they can have a significant impact on the character and appearance of a house and surrounding area. It states that the acceptability of flat topped roof extensions will be dependent on the style and character of the house and surrounding area. It also states that large flat-roof extensions to the front or side of a dwelling can be over-dominant causing the property to appear ‘top heavy’. With respect to the size and scale of dormer windows, it states that they should complement the design and proportion of the original building and that they should be set below the original roof ridge and a significant distance from the edge of the roof. The guidance also says that such extensions should not be built flush with the external wall, but set back to help ensure that they do not dominate the house or street.

8.5 Following concerns expressed by this service in respect of the original plans, amended plans have been submitted to show the dormer roof extension set 0.3 metres below the existing roof ridge, in from the roof boundaries by 0.5 metres and set up from the roof eaves by 0.3 metres. It is considered that the proposal as amended, accords with the guidance in the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance Householder Design Guide (March 2007)

8.6 It is not considered that the amended dormer extension will have a prejudicial impact upon the privacy of adjoining neighbours as the proposed dormer window will be sited approximately 12.5 metres from the rear boundary. Whilst angled views over neighbours’ gardens would be possible, the overlooking of neighbouring properties from upper floor windows is a normal feature of such a residential environment

8.7 The hip to gable roof extension would include a window in the side elevation of the gable roof extension facing 34 Taunton Crescent and it would be prudent to ensure that this window is fixed and obscurely glazed, so as protect the privacy and amenities of the adjoining occupiers (see condition 4).

8.8 The design of the hip to gable roof extension is considered to be acceptable

8.9 Due to concerns raised by this service regarding the length of the front extension, amended plans have been received, which show that the front single storey extension has been reduced in size from a 3.0 metre front projection to 2.5 metres.

8.10 The single storey extension (as amended) adjoins the boundaries with 30 and 34 Taunton Crescent and would be 9 metres from the rear boundary. It is not proposed to insert any windows into the side elevations of the proposed extension facing nos 30 and 34 Taunton Crescent. However, it would be prudent to ensure that no windows can be inserted into this elevation in the future, so as to protect the privacy of adjoining neighbours (see condition 3). The submitted plans show that there are a number of windows towards 6 Bideford Road and it is also considered prudent to ensure that the existing 1.8m boundary fence to the rear boundary adjoining 6 Bideford Road is retained, so as to protect the privacy of adjoining neighbours (see condition 6)

8.11 It is not considered that the single storey extension would have a prejudicial impact upon the amenities of the adjoining occupiers. The proposed extension would replace an existing smaller side annexe and would adjoin the existing annexe to no 34 Taunton Crescent. The extension would project to the rear of no 30 by 2.2 metres and rearwards of no 34 by approximately 3.3 metres. It is noted that the extension would only project 1.0 metre beyond the existing annexe (see plan) and this is considered to be acceptable. The roof would be hipped, which will further reduce the impact upon the adjoining occupiers.

8.12 Although the front extension (as amended) projects 2.5 metres forward of no 32, it would not project forward of the building line (see plan) and it is noted that a number of properties within Taunton Crescent have existing porch extensions which project forward a similar distance in front of the existing dwellings (see plan),

8.13 The design of the single storey extension is considered to be acceptable.

8.14 With regard to the objections received:

i) See paras, 8.6 and 8.10; ii) see paras 8.11 and 8.13; iii) see paras 8.4 and 8.7; iv) it is not considered that the proposal conflicts with the advice given in the deposit UDP policy 2.20 and TAN 12; v) each application is dealt with on its own planning merits; vi) it is not considered that the proposal would lead to significant loss of light/sunlight due to its siting and size; vii) the loss of view is not a material planning consideration; viii) it is not considered that the amended proposal would lead to an increase in noise. Construction noise is dealt with under separate legislation;

97 ix) the scale and mass of the proposed extensions are considered to be acceptable; x) the dwelling is a two-storey property. It is not proposed to raise the ridge height of the existing property. The proposed dormer extension is set in from the adjoining roof boundaries; xi) it is noted that the installation of roof lights into an existing roof is generally “permitted development”; xii) the materials proposed are acceptable; xiii) the Operational Manager, Transportation raises no objections to the proposal; xiv) this is not a material planning consideration; xv) it is considered that the design and appearance of the proposed garage is acceptable;

8.15 With regard to the petition received;

i) the proposed extensions are not considered to be overdevelopment as there is sufficient space within the existing plot to accommodate them; ii) the design of the proposed extension is considered to be acceptable; iii) it is not considered that the proposal would conflict with the advice given in the deposit UDP policy 2.20 and TAN12; iv) see para 8.11 and 8.12; v) the agent has confirmed that the garage will have an “up and over” type door, not a roller shutter and the submitted design is considered to be acceptable;

8.16 With regard to the additional comments referred to in para 7.3; i, ii) noted; iii) it is not a requirement that applicants have to consult neighbours prior to submission of a planning application; iv) the sizes of the proposed extensions are considered to be acceptable and would not lead to overdevelopment of the site. There is sufficient space within the plot to accommodate the extensions and private amenity space; v) the design of the hip to gable extension is considered to be acceptable. Were it not for the other elements of the proposal, the hip to gable extension would likely to constitute permitted development. It is noted that there are gable roof bungalows on the opposite side of Taunton Crescent and gable roof two-storey dwellings within close proximity to the application site; vi) see paras 8.6 and 8.14 x) above; vii) the addresses of objectors are routinely included in Committee reports which are public documents; viii) noted. Where appropriate, correspondence has been acknowledged or answered; ix) the behaviour of applicants/neighbours is not a material planning consideration. x) The applicant and neighbours have been made aware that anyone can comment on a planning application and that any representations are available to view as a public document;

98 xi) A separate response has been sent in regard to this issue. xii) confirm that all representations have been reported to Committee. xiii) noted, see report above; xiv) noted.

8.17 Planning permission is recommended, subject to appropriate conditions.

99 100 101 102 COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/01405/DCH APPLICATION DATE: 09/08/2010

ED: CYNCOED

APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission

APPLICANT: Mr Motiur Rahman LOCATION: 3 KESWICK AVENUE, ROATH PARK, CARDIFF, CF23 5PU PROPOSAL: RETENTION OF REAR DORMER EXTENSION

______

RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED.

1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 Planning permission is sought for the retention of a rear dormer extension at 3 Keswick Avenue.

1.2 Planning permission was originally granted for a rear dormer roof extension by planning permission 09/769/E in August 2009. The approved rear dormer was of a flat roof design with the sides of the extension set approximately 0.6m from the ‘notional’ boundaries with No’s 1 and 5 Keswick Avenue with the base of the dormer positioned 0.8m from the bottom of the existing roof and the proposed flat roof positioned 650mm below the original roof ridge of the dwelling.

1.3 However, the dormer has been constructed larger than approved and is now positioned 470mm below the original roof ridge of the dwelling.

1.4 The application has been submitted following an investigation by the Council’s Planning Enforcement Service.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 The application site is a mid terraced house on the south side of Keswick Avenue. To the rear of the site is a lane which separates the rear gardens of Keswick Avenue from those in Grasmere. This lane connects to a further lane which is positioned to the rear boundary of the dwellings fronting Lake Road West. This lane also forms the boundary of the Roath Park Lake and Gardens Conservation Area. To the west of Keswick Avenue lies the Cardiff to Rhymney Valley railway line which is some 45 metres from the application site.

2.2 It is noted that the ridge line of the terrace of which 3 Keswick Avenue forms a part, steps up at three points along the length of the terrace, such that the roof ridge of the attached house at 5 Keswick Avenue is some 0.5m above the roof

103 ridge of the application site.

3. SITE HISTORY

3.1 Planning permission 09/769/E – Rear Dormer Roof Extension – Approved August 2009

2.2 Planning permission 98/366/N – Roof space Conversion – Approved April 1998

2.3 Planning permission 94/753/N – Conservatory – Approved June 1994

4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 The site is allocated as part of an area of existing housing on the City of Cardiff Local Plan Proposals Map.

4.2 The following Local Plan policies are of relevance to the determination of this application:

Policy 11 (Design and Aesthetic Quality)

4.3 The following policies from the deposit Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) are also of relevance:

Policy 2.20 (Good Design) Policy 2.24 (Residential Amenity)

4.4 The following supplementary planning guidance is also of relevance:

Householders Design Guide (2007)

5. INTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES

5.1 The Operational Manager (Transportation) notes that the property has two existing frontage off street parking spaces as well as a rear garage. Mindful also that the conversion of the loft space to living accommodation does not require planning permission, he raises no objections to the planning application.

5.2 The Strategic Planning Manager (Urban Design) makes the following comments:

“The dormer window in question has been constructed at greater height than that permitted under planning permission Ref: 09/00769; however it appears that all of the other dimensions accord with those indicated within the planning application drawings.

The difference in height between the approved plans and that constructed on site is 180mm. Taking this difference into consideration and given that the top

104 of the dormer would still remain 470mm below the ridge line of the main roof make it difficult to sustain an objection to the proposal on the ground of the impact the extra height would create.

In the determination of the initial planning application for the dormer, while no formal advice or comment was sought from the Authority’s urban design team, guidance set out within Cardiff Council’s Householder Design Guide was considered and the development perceived to fall within its limitations. The application was also considered by planning committee and a site visit made culminating in the application being approved.

Given that the subsequent application seeks permission for a dormer window subject to the difference outlined above alone, the severity of the alteration is not considered substantial enough for the development to fall outside of the parameters set within the Householder Guidance. It would therefore be difficult to argue a case for the refusal of the proposal on design grounds given that a precedent has been established in the granting of the original planning permission. “

6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEES RESPONSES

6.1 None.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 The occupiers of 5 Keswick Avenue have submitted a lengthy objection to the proposal which can be summarised as follows:

(a) The original proposal submitted by the applicant was considered unacceptable by officers. The recommendations made to the applicant have been ignored and they have constructed a larger and more dominant and intrusive development than what was previously allowed. (b) The straightforward response to the application is to refuse planning permission. To not do so would be to give free licence to developers to construct even worse developments than the existing poor standard that has been approved so far. (c) The current proposal is of a poor quality design, over-dominant, intrusive, not in sympathy with the area or the host building, unbalanced and now the proposal is not even set down from the ridge or eaves by a significant amount. (d) The development approved was terrible and to make it even worse is unacceptable (and was not acceptable to the Local Planning Authority which is why amendments were required). (e) The proposal is contrary to the principles detailed in the Householder Design Guide for roof extensions. Due to the highly visible nature of the extension both from surrounding properties, the adjacent conservation area (less than 10m from the site) and from the busy passenger railway line it is clearly inappropriate that the existing extension be approved. (f) The occupier of 5 Keswick Ave refers to an Inspector’s enforcement appeal decision relating to a flat roof dormer extension at Lansdown

105 Road, Canton, dismissed in 2008, when the Inspector expressed the view that it was not clear to him why the Council had permitted a large box dormer on the roof of the terraced house in an area of mainly two storey houses. (g) The design of the dormer is poor and does not relate to the existing building or surrounding area in terms of development form, scale, materials or detailing. (h) The neighbourhood has a very strong style and character with the dwelling on Ambleside, Grasmere, Keswick and Ullswater Avenues being designed in the 1930s. Whilst numbers of the properties have had the lofts converted these have in general, respected the design and scale of the properties in the area. (i) The proposed dormer extension is completely out of scale, positioning, detailing and materials to the existing dwelling, wider street scene and wider area. It creates an unbalanced and discordant feature in the street scene completely at odds with the strong and harmonious character of this area. Whilst this area is not located within the Conservation area it was developed at the same time as the properties fronting Lake Road West and exhibits much of the same qualities and therefore provides a harmonious setting for the adjacent Conservation Area and is contrary to Policy 11 of the City of Cardiff Local Plan and policies 2.20 and 2.53 of the deposited UDP (j) The proposal is clearly contrary to the guidance on page 18 of the design guide on loft extensions. The dormer extension as opposed to a dormer window is unsympathetic to the design of the original house and clearly does not look as if it is part of it. The large flat topped extension is discordant with the house, street and area, is over-dominant and gives the property an alien impression, top heavy and completely at odds with its surroundings. No concession on design has been made to making the proposal in any way sympathetic to the area and this makes the proposal an ugly discordant feature completely contrary to the guidance in the SPG. Whilst set in a small amount from the sides this in no way responds to the design issues addressed by the SPG or policies in the development plan. (k) The proposal is clearly contrary to the guidance on page 20 of the Householder Design Guide. One large box dormer extension is proposed – out of scale and proportion to this modest terrace property. An example of where the design guidance has been followed can be seen at 16 Keswick Avenue where 2 small roof dormers have been installed in scale and proportion to the dwelling. In the case of the proposed dormer this has been set in from the edge of the roof by a limited amount but still represents an incongruous development out of scale and proportion to both the house and area. The development clearly dominates the house and the street which have a strong style and character. Should the proposal be allowed the potential for other similar proposals to come forward leading to a terracing effect would be a real possibility. (l) Setting the dormer in from the roof edges by a limited amount does nothing to address the details and design requirements specified in the Householder Design Guide or address good design as a specific issue. Design needs to be looked at in context and a large box dormer is a poor

106 design which does not take account of the strong style and character of the house and area and is out of scale and proportion to them. (m) Whilst the development is not in a conservation area, Keswick Avenue borders on the Roath Park Lake Conservation Area and shares much of the same characteristics of this area as well as affecting its setting and character. The proposed development presents an unattractive and discordant addition to the street scene which detracts from the character of the area and the special character of the Conservation Area. The rhythm in building composition and roof detailing which is characteristic of the area would be further damaged by the introduction of this insensitive form of development. (n) The overall design of the proposal shows no vision, effort or indeed any attempt to demonstrate its response to the character and context of the existing dwelling or the area. (o) The proposal diminishes the distinctive character of the area by introducing a poorly designed alien form of development on this site. The form, style and materials proposed for the development are all uncharacteristic of this area in terms of scale and design (p) The negative impact of the development on the area is exacerbated by the sites visual prominence in particular to passengers on the North Cardiff and Cardiff – Rhymney Valley Line (a strategic highway route) which passes close to the site. This gives the area a very high visual prominence as the site is viewed by hundreds of people every day. Because of the sites visual prominence the requirement to seek a good design is clearly heightened. This stretch of railway is very busy and serves North Cardiff (Coryton-Whitchurch-Rhiwbina-Birchgrove-Ty Glas- Heath and Llanishen-Lisvane-Thornhill) as well as Caerphilly and the Rhymney Valley. The development is clearly visible from this main entrance and access point to Cardiff City Centre and would give a poor impression of the standard of design considered acceptable in Cardiff by the Council contrary to its stated commitment to raising design standards. The impact of this poorly designed and discordant development will be intrusive and negatively effect their perception of this strong characterful area. (q) The large scale of the dormer creating in effect a build out of the roof will lead to excessive visual intrusion and also privacy issues for surrounding properties. The proposal will have the effect of creating an additional storey on this dwelling leading to an unacceptably intrusive and overbearing development at odds with its surroundings. Whilst loft conversion can be created sympathetically this proposal’s scale and design means that it has an overbearing effect and increases the potential for overlooking of nearby properties to an unreasonable and unacceptable degree as to what can be reasonably expected and accepted. The proposal is contrary to policy 2.24 of the deposited Cardiff UDP.

7.2 The occupiers of 1 Keswick Avenue objects to the proposal for the following reasons: a. The extension as built destroys the roof line of the terrace and it appears to be much larger than planning permission was granted for. b. They have concerns that the house will become a seven bedroom

107 property. c. As the first planning permission was refused, it is hard to understand how planning permission can now be given for the dormer to remain at its present size. d. If this application is allowed it calls into question the duties of the planning department and planning committee and gives out the message that ‘do as you like and we will pass it regardless of whether planning permission is granted or not’.

7.3 The occupier of 4 Grasmere Ave objects to the proposal as they are of the opinion that it is too big and not in keeping with the area. Also their privacy has gone. They have no objection to velux roof lights.

8. ANALYSIS

8.1 The difference between the development approved by planning permission 09/769/E and that which is now built on site is that the flat roof of the dormer is positioned 470mm below the original ridge of the roof of the dwelling rather than 650mm. In other respects the dormer as built reflects that approved by planning permission 09/769/E.

8.2 It is considered that the key issue is the effect of this increase in height of the dormer upon the character and appearance of the area and on the living conditions of neighbours.

8.3 In respect of the living conditions of neighbours, it was considered by Planning Committee that the dormer proposed by planning application 09/769/E would not unduly dominate the adjoining properties. It is considered that the increase in the height of the dormer by 180mm does not result in a development which significantly alters the situation particularly having regard to the fact that the dormer is positioned within the roof slope set approximately 0.6m from the roof boundaries and 0.8m up from the eaves of the house.

8.4 The bedroom windows within the dormer will directly overlook the applicant’s rear garden and rear lane beyond this. The Council approved Householder Design Guide suggest that any new windows introduced at first floor or above should be positioned 10.5m from the boundary of the neighbours to the rear of the site and 21m from existing windows within the rear neighbours dwellings. The windows in the dormer are 22.5m from the rear boundary of the application site and 45m from the nearest dwelling to the rear. These distances are considered acceptable and accord with the guidance contained within the Householder Design Guide. Whilst the dormer adds windows at 2nd storey level and angled views over the neighbour’s gardens would be possible, it is noted that the ability to overlook neighbours gardens from the dormer will be similar to the ability to overlook neighbours gardens from the existing first floor windows of the application site. Such relationships are an accepted feature of semi detached and terraced properties and in this case it is considered the relationship of the development to neighbours is reasonable.

108 8.5 With respect to analysing the visual impact of the dormer extension on the appearance of the house and surrounding area, it would be beneficial to re- iterate advice which is provided by the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance: Householder Design Guide, approved in March 2007. The SPG states that the design of dormer windows should be carefully considered as they have a significant impact on the character and appearance of a house and surrounding area. It states that the acceptability of flat topped roof extensions will be dependent on the style and character of the house and surrounding area. It also states that large flat roofed extensions to the front or side of a dwelling can be over-dominant causing the property to appear ‘top heavy’. With respect to the size and scale of dormer windows, it states that they should complement the design and proportion of the original building and that they should be set below the original roof ridge and a significant distance from the edge of the roof. The guidance also says that such extensions should not be built flush with the external wall, but set back to help ensure that they do not dominate the house or street. On terraced properties, the Guidance advises that the scale and positioning of rear dormers should ensure that a terracing at roof level is avoided.

8.6 The proposed dormer is located on the rear elevation of the dwelling and not the primary road frontage of Keswick Avenue. In many cases, such extensions would constitute ‘permitted development’. Permission is considered to be required in this case, due to the presence of the rear lane and therefore the Council can exercise some control in regards to its siting and appearance. The structure is set back from the external wall by approximately 0.8 metres and in from each side roof boundary by 0.6m as approved by planning permission 09/796/E. The only difference to that approved is that the dormer has been built 180mm higher. The consideration is whether this increase in height would add to the mass and scale of the dormer so that it is now considered incongruous. It is officers opinion that having regard to the fact that the dormer does not encroach any nearer to the side roof boundaries or the eaves than that approved and it is higher by only a relatively small amount it does not result in a development which is out of scale with the rear appearance of the dwelling neither does it prejudice the overall character of the area. The tiled finish of the dormer allows it to be integrated successfully within the roof plane so that the appearance of the area is also not prejudiced. Furthermore due to the dormer being sited 0.6m from the side roof boundaries and the fact that the roof of No. 5 Keswick Ave is stepped up by approximately 0.5m it is officer’s opinion that should neighbouring occupiers carryout a similar development the resultant situation would not create a terracing effect. It should be noted that the Local Planning Authority would have control over other dormer extensions within Keswick Ave. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal is generally in accordance with the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance in this regard.

8.7 A site visit by members of Planning Committee in August 2009 agreed that having regard to the location of the site to the rear of Lake Road West, it was not reasonable to argue that the original proposal would detract unduly from the character and appearance of the Roath Park Lake and Gardens Conservation Area which lies to the east and from which only glimpses of

109 Keswick Avenue are possible from Lake Road West itself. It was decided that whilst views of the development are possible from the rear of the dwellings fronting Lake Road West and from the rear lane, the development, having regard to its location, would not undermine the character of the Conservation Area. It is considered in respect of this revised development that raising the height of the dormer by 180mm does not alter this situation.

8.8 As mentioned above, the application site is not within the Conservation Area and is residential in character. The uniform rhythm of the terrace is noted but it should also be noted that the ridgeline of the terrace ‘steps up’ at three points along the length of the terrace, with the roof ridge of the attached house at No. 5 being some 0.5 metres above the ridge of No. 3. This, to an extent, breaks the rhythm of the rear roof slope of the terrace of which no. 3 forms a part. Furthermore the properties in Keswick Ave, which lie outside the conservation area do not warrant special protection from modern development and it is considered that a dormer loft extension which is providing additional residential accommodation does not prejudice the residential character of the area. While the development may interrupt the rhythm of the rear roof slopes of the dwellings, given the specific context of the site, the reasonable scale of the dormer would not result in a terracing effect should neighbours construct similar loft extensions. Tiles to match the existing roof of the dwelling have been incorporated and as a result it is considered that the development as built is not visually obtrusive, and it would therefore be un-reasonable to refuse planning permission for its retention.

8.9 The Strategic Planning Manager (Urban Design) has been consulted on the application and his full comments are contained within paragraph 5.2 of this report. He raises no objection to the siting and appearance of the dormer and he notes that the difference between that approved by planning permission 09/769/E and that build is not substantially different and complies with the guidance contained within the Householder Design Guide in respect to dormer roof extensions.

8.10 It is noted that the development can be viewed from the adjacent railway line and the rear lanes surrounding the site but such viewpoints do not alter my opinion that the development is acceptable.

8.11 The dormer is similar an existing dormer roof extension at the rear of 10 Grasmere Avenue approved retrospectively in 2008, although the roof of that extension has not be set significantly below the ridge line. It is also evident that there are several other dormer roof extensions in the vicinity (e.g. at 16 Keswick Avenue, 4 and 16 Ullswater Avenue) which are of varying size and design.

8.12 With regard to the appeal decision at 156 Lansdowne Road, to which the occupier of 5 Keswick Avenue refers, the Council in 2006 approved a flat roof dormer extension set back from the rear wall of the house by 0.6 metres, with a roof approximately 0.5 metres below the ridge of the existing roof and set in from the side by 0.6 metres. The extension was built larger than approved and enforcement action resulted in an appeal which was dismissed. A revised

110 scheme was subsequently approved. It should also be noted that each application is treated on its own merits and in this case the property subject of the appeal is located in a prominent location at a very busy road junction.

8.13 The occupier of 5 Keswick Ave has suggested that the dormer as built is similar to that originally proposed which was required to be amended due to officers concerns during the determination of planning permission 09/769/E. While it is correct that the dormer approved by planning permission 09/769/E was amended, the amendments required the dormer to be set in further from the side roof boundaries and up from the eaves. In this respect, the dormer has been built in accordance with the amended plans. The height of the dormer from the ridge was not amended. The dormer was always proposed to be 650mm from the ridgeline.

8.14 National planning guidance contained within Technical Advice Note 9 (Enforcement of Planning Control) states that in consideration of enforcement action, the decisive issue for the Local Planning Authority should be whether the breach of planning control would unacceptably affect public amenity or the existing use of land and buildings meriting protection in the public interest. It is noted that the dormer is on the rear of the dwelling and does not form part of the public ‘frontage’ of Keswick Ave. Enforcement action should be commensurate with the breach of planning control to which it relates; it is usually inappropriate to take formal enforcement action against a trivial or technical breach of control which causes no harm to public amenity. The intention should be to remedy the effects of the breach of planning control, not to punish the person(s) carrying out the breach.

8.15 Following an investigation by the Councils Planning Enforcement Section it was apparent that the development differs marginally on site from that granted planning permission. Accordingly, and in line with the guidance contained within Technical Advice Note 9 a retrospective planning application was invited. It is for the Local Planning Authority to determine this application based on its merits.

8.16 Members of Committee should note that if planning permission were to be refused for the dormer a ‘fallback’ position would exist whereby the dormer could be altered so as to comply with that previously approved (09/796/E refers). However, despite this situation it remains officer’s opinion that the present scheme is acceptable as it is not considered to prejudice the character or appearance of the area of the living conditions of neighbours.

8.17 Accordingly, unconditional retrospective planning permission is recommended.

111 112 113 114 LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION

COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/01521/DCH APPLICATION DATE: 16/08/2010

ED: RHIWBINA

APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission

APPLICANT: Mr Cornick LOCATION: 203 PANTBACH ROAD, RHIWBINA, CARDIFF, CF14 6AE PROPOSAL: PORCH AND DORMER EXTENSIONS TO SIDES WITH TWO STOREY EXTENSION AT REAR TO CREATE DORMER BUNGALOW

______

RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. C01 Statutory Time Limit

2. The consent relates to the application as amended by the revised plans numbered PL/01B, PL/02B attached to and forming part of this planning application. Reason: The plans amend and form part of the application.

3. E3D Retain Parking Within Site

RECOMMENDATION 2: The applicant is advised to contact Mr John Haines in Highways, Brindley Road on tel no 029 2078 5241 in order to agree modifications to the existing crossover on Pantbach Road.

RECOMMENDATION 3: The applicant is advised to ensure that the new parking area is constructed in permanent material, eg tarmac or block paving (not stones/gravel etc).

RECOMMENDATION 4: The applicant must ensure that any access gates proposed as part of this application do not open out onto the public highway (pavement).

1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 It is proposed to extend a detached bungalow at 203 Pantbach Road, Rhiwbina by adding two pitched roof dormers to the sides of the existing roof and constructing a two storey extension to the rear with accommodation on two floors. The rear extension would be 3.9m long, full width and have a pitched roof which is set in from the plane of the existing side roof slopes and

115 have the same eaves and ridge height. (see plan below). Materials would match existing apart from the rear elevation where a brick wall is proposed. Amended plans have been submitted to show the dimensions of the side dormers as recently constructed and to change the rear elevation from render to brick, a decision by the applicant. The enlarged dwelling would have five bedrooms (three existing).

1.2 In addition to the above, it is proposed to build a small enclosed front porch (2.1m by 1.3m), insert two roof lights in the front elevation and provide a second vehicle access from Pantbach Road in conjunction with the provision of a parking area to occupy the entire front garden.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 203 Pantbach Road is a detached bungalow situated on the west side of Pantbach Road in the middle of a line of bungalows of similar design. It has a ‘pyramid’ shaped roof and has not been previously extended. There is one parking space in the front garden accessed by a crossover.

2.3 201 Pantbach Road has a pitched roof rear dormer. 205 has a single storey rear extension of c 3.0m length which aligns with the side wall of 205 and is sited c1.0m from the 203/205 boundary.

3. SITE HISTORY

3.1 10/00788W : application for a two storey rear extension and front dormers at 203 Pantbach Road withdrawn prior to determination following the agent being advised that refusal was likely on design and residential amenity grounds.

4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 Cardiff Local Plan policy 11 (design) Deposit UDP polices 2.20 (design) and 2.24 (residential amenity) Householder Design Guide SPG

5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

5.1 Transportation has no objection subject to a ‘retain parking’ condition. It also requests that the applicant be advised to contact the highways service to agree changes to the crossover, be advised to surface the new parking area in permanent material and to ensure the gates do not open over the public highway.

6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

6.1 Nil

116

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 Neighbouring occupiers have been notified. The occupier of 205 Pantbach Road expresses concern re the dormer extension (side dormer) which is opposite the dining room window of 205. The dormer will result in the loss of natural light to this room.

7.2 Cllr Cowan has requested the application be determined by Planning Committee. The dormer will have a detrimental effect on neighbouring properties. The development is unneighbourly, detrimental to the street scene and out of keeping with the area.

8. ANALYSIS

8.1 Design: the appearance of the front elevation is little changed by the proposed development and its visual character is retained. The two side dormers, which have recently been constructed under permitted development rights, are visible from the public highway but are of traditional dormer design being of limited dimensions and incorporating a hipped roof. The side dormers are considered to not harm the visual character of the building or the street scene. The rear extension will significantly change the appearance of the rear of the building. However, the dwellings in the vicinity exhibit a variety of forms at the rear and the changes, including the use of brick, are considered to be acceptable.

8.2 Residential amenity: the rear extension will project 4.5 m beyond the rear elevation of the bungalow at 201. Its eaves height will be 2.5m with roof above rising to a ridge of 6.1m. The extension will be sited 2.0m from the 201/203 boundary and 5.0m from the closest rear window in 201. It will also be sited to the north of 201. For the above reasons the impact of the rear extension on the amenities of the occupiers of 201 with regard to light and outlook is considered to be acceptable.

8.3 No 205 has a rear extension of c 1.0m shorter length than the proposed rear extension and which aligns with the side elevation of 205. Therefore the proposal would have minimal impact on the outlook from the rear windows of 205. No. 205 also has a side facing window serving a dining area of a lounge/diner. This window is situated opposite the side door of 203 and is marked on the attached plan. The existence of a habitable room with a principal side facing window results from the construction of a rear extension at 205 which caused the loss of the rear outlook from this room although the opposite end of the room receives some natural light through a conservatory attached to the rear of the room. The proposed rear extension will result in some loss of natural light to and outlook from the side facing window in 205, however, it is considered that this is not sufficiently great to merit refusal on amenity grounds. In reaching this conclusion the fact that a relatively small area of a relatively large bungalow is affected has been borne in mind. The occupier of 205 has expressed concern re the side dormer. This is not located opposite the dining room window (centre of dormer and 205

117 window offset by c 2.0m) and is not considered to materially affect light to 205). It is noted that the dormer comprises permitted development

8.4 It is concluded for the above reasons that the impact of the development on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers is acceptable. Permission is recommended subject to a retain parking condition and the supplementary advice provided by Transportation.

118 119 120 LOCAL MEMBER OBJECTION

COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/01186/DCI APPLICATION DATE: 19/08/2010

ED: CATHAYS

APP: TYPE: Variation of conditions

APPLICANT: Mr Mohammed Chowdhury LOCATION: 151 CRWYS ROAD, CATHAYS, CARDIFF, CF24 4XT PROPOSAL: VARIATION OF CONDITION 3 OF PLANNING PERMISSION 07/1571C TO EXTEND THE OPENING HOURS OF THE PREMISES FROM 08:00 - 23:00 TO 08:00 - MIDNIGHT EVERYDAY, REMOVAL OF CONDITION 7 AND VARIATION OF CONDITION 6 OF PERMISSION 07/1571/C TO ALLOW THE SALE OF HOT FOOD FOR CONSUMPTION OFF THE PREMISES, AND VARIATION OF CONDITION 6 OF PERMISSION 07/1571/C TO ALLOW RETENTION OF THE USE OF THE PREMISES AS A RESTAURANT ______

RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. The proposed extension of opening hours and sale of hot food for consumption off the premises would be likely to result in unacceptable noise nuisance for adjoining occupiers and local residents, resulting from activities at the premises and from customers frequenting the premises during evening hours, and therefore fails to accord with the Council’s adopted “Restaurants, takeaways and other food and drink uses” supplementary planning guidance note, and Technical Advice Note 11: Noise.

2. The proposed extension of opening hours would be likely to exacerbate existing problems of late-night anti-social behaviour, and crime and disorder in the Crwys Road area, having a detrimental impact on public safety. The proposal therefore fails to accord with Welsh Office Circular 16/94 “Planning Out Crime” and paragraph 4.10.12 of Planning Policy Wales (June 2010).

121 1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 An application for the variation of conditions attached to planning permission 07/1571/C in order to allow the extension of opening hours, permit takeaway sales and regularise the existing restaurant use at an existing restaurant at number 151 Crwys Road, currently occupied by Mowgli’s.

1.2 Planning permission 07/1571/C, the change of use of the ground floor from retail to coffee shop/café was granted on 21st August , 2007. The permission was subject to a number of conditions, including conditions to restrict opening hours (condition 3), prevent takeaway sales (condition 7) and to allow use only as a coffee/café (condition 6).

Condition 3 of the permission reads: “No member of the public shall be admitted to or allowed to remain on the premises between the hours of 23:00 and 08:00 on any day. Reason: To ensure that the amenities of occupiers of other premises in the vicinity of the site are protected”.

Condition 6 reads: “The ground floor shall be used as a coffee shop/cafe, and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class A3 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument amending, revoking or re- enacting that Order). Reason: Other A3 uses could prejudice the amenities of the area.”

Condition 7 reads: Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (or any Order amending or revoking and re-enacting that Order) no sale of hot food for consumption off the premises shall take place from the premises. Reason: To ensure that the use of the premises does not prejudice the amenities of the area.

1.3 This application seeks to vary condition 3 of permission 07/1571/C in order to extend the hours of opening to midnight each day. It also seeks the variation of condition 6 and removal of condition 7 to allow the sale of hot food for consumption off the premises. Finally, as the premises is currently being used as a restaurant and condition 6 restricts use to a coffee shop/café, the application also seeks the variation of condition 6 in order to regularise the existing restaurant use.

1.4 The application is supported by an Access Statement.

122 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 The application site is located within the Crwys Road/Woodville Road district centre, in the centre of a parade of two storey terraces extending from number 131 to 151 Crwys Road. The application site frontage contains 5no. ground floor commercial units, including an existing A3 use - Café Calcio, at no. 145 Crwys Road, which has no planning history but does benefit from a premises licence that allows opening to midnight on Mondays-Saturdays, and to 11.30pm on Sundays. There is an existing fish and ship shop in the opposite frontage, at no. 132 Crwys Road, which has advertised closing hours of 11pm, each day.

2.2 The application site is adjoined by a side lane leading to an electricity substation, and a beauty parlour at no. 149 , “Tans and Hands”.

2.3 There appear to be 4no. flats above the ground floor commercial unit on the application site and above the adjoining premises at no. 149.

3. SITE HISTORY

07/1571/C Change of use of ground floor front room from retail to coffee shop/café. Permission granted: 21/8/007

4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 Relevant National Planning Guidance:

Planning Policy Wales (2010) TAN 4: Retailing and Town Centres TAN 11: Noise TAN 12: Design TAN 18: Transport TAN 21: Waste

Circular 16/94: Planning Out Crime

4.2 Relevant City of Cardiff Local Plan policies:

11: Design & Aesthetic Quality 17: Parking & Servicing Facilities 19: Provision for Pedestrians 20: Provision for Special Needs Groups 49: District & Local Centres

123 4.3 Relevant Deposit Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) policies:

2.20: Good Design 2.24: Residential Amenity 2.36: District & Local Centres 2.57: Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements 2.74: Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development

4.4 Relevant Supplementary Planning Guidance:

Restaurants, Takeaways and other Food & Drink Uses (June 1996) Waste Collection and Storage Facilities (March 2007) Access, circulation and parking requirements (January, 2010)

5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

5.1 Highways and Waste Management (Waste Management) An increase in opening hours may lead to an increase in the volume of waste produced, which may require an increase in refuse storage capacity or increased frequency of collections. The agent should note that a commercial contract for the collection and disposal of commercial waste will be required.

5.2 Strategic Planning and Environment (Pollution Control) An objection is raised in terms of noise nuisance due to the extension of opening hours and by allowing the sale of food for consumption off the premises. The Pollution Control officer notes that the objection accords with the Council’s adopted “Restaurants, takeaways and other food and drink uses” SPG. No comments are provided in respect of air nuisance or contaminated land.

5.3 Transportation Policy and Development No objection.

6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

6.1 South Wales Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor South Wales Police note that crime in the Cathays area is high and an objection is raised as the proposed extension of opening hours – variation of condition 3 of permission 07/1571/C - would further exacerbate the situation in respect of crime and disorder. South Wales Police note that this objection is based on evidence that was previously submitted to Cardiff Council, and contained within the Cardiff Council Licensing 2003 Statement of Licensing Policy 31st January (as amended 24th July, 2009).

The Police objection is based on a number of grounds: there is already an over concentration of late night refreshment premises in the Crwys Road

124 area, by increasing the hours, the premises could attract people into the area who have consumed alcohol and are then at a higher risk of becoming a victim of crime or an offender, there is a strong correlation between the levels of crime and late night refreshment premises, and the saturation of similar types of night time economy establishments lead to the potential for social disorder. The Police response refers to a number of recent appeal decisions where the Planning Inspectorate has treated the impact on crime and disorder as a material planning consideration.

The Police have no objection to the continued use of the premises as a restaurant or to the sale of hot food for consumption off the premises.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 Local members and neighbours have been notified. The application has been advertised on site and in the press.

7.2 Cllr. Pickard has written to object to the application as it seeks to extend the opening hours of the restaurant/takeaway past 11pm, the proposal therefore contradicts the recently agreed licensing saturation policy covering Crwys Road.

7.3 A letter of objection has been received from the occupiers of no. 147 Crwys Road on the grounds of lack of parking, noise and disturbance.

8. ANALYSIS

8.1 The main issue arising from this application is whether the proposed extension of opening hours and the introduction of a takeaway use would generate unacceptable nuisance for residents.

8.2 In terms of opening hours, paragraph 4.12 of the Council’s adopted “Restaurants, takeaways and other food and drink uses” supplementary planning guidance note states that the local planning authority wishes to restrict further intensification of disturbance to surrounding residents when applications for extended opening hours are considered. The SPG also notes that in district centres, such as Crwys Road/Woodville Road, opening hours will usually be restricted to 11.30pm but where there are nearby residents, earlier closing times may be imposed.

8.3 In respect of the proposed sale of hot food for consumption off the premises, paragraph 4.10 of the “Restaurants, takeaways and other food and drink uses” SPG notes that hot food takeaways can have particular harmful effects on the surrounding living environment, and applications proposing such uses will be carefully assessed against the potential impact on residential amenity.

125 8.4 The use of the premises as a restaurant does not raise any concerns as there is not considered to be any significant difference between the use of the premises as a coffee shop/café or as a restaurant. It is noted that cooking of food on the premises was not excluded by permission 07/1571/C and that fume extraction details have been approved. In terms of the reasons for condition 6, it is not considered that the restaurant use would prejudice the amenities of the area to any greater extent than the authorised coffee shop/café.

8.5 Pollution Control have considered the application – taking account of guidance in the “Restaurants, takeaways and other food and drink uses” SPG - in terms of its impact on residential amenity and raise an objection as it is considered that the extension of opening times and the introduction of hot food takeaway sales would have a detrimental effect on the amenities of nearby residents by adding to noise nuisance in the area.

8.6 South Wales Police have considered the proposal in terms of its potential impact on crime and disorder. Paragraph 4.10.12 of Planning Policy Wales (June 2010) notes that:

“Local authorities are under a legal obligation to consider the need to prevent and reduce crime and disorder in all decisions that they take. Crime prevention and the fear of crime are social considerations to which regard must be given by local planning authorities in the preparation of development plans. They should be reflected in supplementary planning guidance, and may be material considerations in the determination of planning applications. The aim should be to produce safe environments through good design”.

8.7 Welsh Office Circular 16/94 “Planning Out Crime” is also relevant and, in paragraph 3 states, “Crime prevention is capable of being a material consideration when planning applications are considered”. The Circular advises that local planning authorities should consult police architectural liaison officers when determining planning applications.

8.8 In this case, the South Wales Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor has indicated that there is an existing high level of crime and anti-social behaviour in Crwys Road. South Wales Police object to the application as they consider that the extension of opening hours to midnight each day would be likely to exacerbate the existing problems of crime and anti-social behaviour in Crwys Road, having a negative impact on public safety. It should be noted that the Planning Inspectorate has recently dismissed a number a number of appeals involving late-night food and drink uses on the grounds that they would increase levels of crime and anti-social behaviour, confirming that crime prevention and the fear of crime are material planning considerations. These decisions include a recent appeal at no. 220 City Road (APP/Z6815/A/10/2127316), which related to an application (09/01973/C) for

126 the extension of opening hours at an existing hot food takeaway (in that case, from 0900-1330 to 0900-0100, each day)

8.9 The letter of objection from Councillor Pickard is noted, although planning committee should be aware that the saturation zone referred to is contained in the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy; it is a licensing policy, not a planning document. The neighbour objection is also noted – the Transportation and Policy officer raises no objection to the application in terms of parking and the issue of noise nuisance is addressed in the above analysis.

8.10 The objections from Pollution Control and the South Wales Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor are noted. It is considered that the objection from Pollution Control on the grounds of noise nuisance accords with the Council’s approved “Restaurants, takeaways and other food and drink uses” SPG, which states that hot food takeaway uses can generate particular harmful effects on the surrounding living environment, and that opening hours in district centres will normally be restricted to 11.30pm. The objection from South Wales Police is a material consideration and, as discussed, Planning Inspectors in recent appeal decisions have taken the view that crime prevention and the fear of crime are valid material planning considerations. The Police objection is based on evidence, which indicates a high level of crime in the Crwys Road area, and this evidence has been given significant weight by Planning Inspectors when considering appeal proposals. Both objections are therefore considered to be significant enough to justify a refusal of planning permission.

8.11 For the reasons detailed above, it is recommended that planning permission be refused.

127 128 COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/01276/DCI APPLICATION DATE: 20/07/2010

ED: CATHAYS

APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission

APPLICANT: Mr Cro LOCATION: GROSVENOR HOUSE, GREYFRIARS ROAD, CITY CENTRE, CARDIFF, CF10 3AD PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF TIMBER FENCING TO CREATE SMOKING TERRACE ON ROOF ______

RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. C01 Statutory Time Limit

2. This permission relates solely to the area outlined in yellow on approved drawing number 7239-002A. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt.

3. No food or drink shall be sold or consumed within the approved smoking terrace area. Reason: In the interests of amenity.

4. There shall be no provision of entertainment, including live music or recorded music within the approved smoking terrace area. Reason: In the interests of amenity.

5. The approved smoking terrace area shall be supervised at all times by a Security Industry Authority (SIA) licensed member of staff. Reason: In the interests of amenity and safety.

6. The use hereby permitted shall be discontinued on or before 13th October 2011. Reason: To enable the local planning authority to assess the effects of the development at the end of the period with regard to any fresh application that may be submitted.

7. The timber fencing hereby approved shall be painted in a colour to be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and thereafter maintained.

129 Reason: To ensure a satisfactory finished appearance to the development.

RECOMMENDATION 2: The applicant should note that a building regulations submission will be required.

1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 A full application for the erection of timber fencing on the roof of Grosvenor House - currently occupied by Glam nightclub – for use as a rooftop smoking terrace.

1.2 The proposed finish of the fenced enclosure is described on the application form as a shiplap timber fence with painted finish. The proposed fencing would be approximately 2m high. The proposed timber fencing would enclose an area of approximately 100sqm to the rear of the existing roofspace, set off from the Greyfriars Road elevation by approximately 28m. The proposed smoking terrace area would be at least approximately 50m away from the Greyfriars Road elevation of the Park Plaza hotel and Park View apartments.

1.3 The supporting design and access statement notes that the timber fencing is required in order to form an enclosure to provide an external smoking terrace for customers of the Glam nightclub. The terrace would be accessed from second floor level via an existing roof opening.

1.4 The existing nightclub benefits from a premises licence which allows opening to the general public from 10:00 to 06:00, every day, with the sale of alcohol for consumption on the premises limited to the hours of 10:00 to 04:00, each day. There is no restriction on the opening hours of the nightclub from a planning perspective – a Lawful Development Certificate (LDC) was issued by the Council in 2005, confirming the lawful use but it does not address hours of opening.

1.5 The application is supported by a Design and Access statement.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 The site relates to a 3 storey building in Greyfriars Road, currently occupied by a bar on the ground floor – Fat Cat, and nightclub on the upper floors – Glam nightclub. Another nightclub, Oceana adjoins the site on its eastern elevation, whilst the western elevation abuts an entrance to an underground car park. The southern elevation is defined by a rear lane, Crockherbtown Lane, which leads from Park Place to Greyfriars Place. The existing roof area contains a variety of plant and mechanical apparatus.

130

2.2 The application site is located in the Windsor Place Conservation Area.

3. SITE HISTORY

3.1 05/1139/C Certificate of Lawful Use – Existing for a “casino club, restaurant and bars”. Granted 11/7/2005.

3.2 05/794/C Change of use from D2 to café bar (ground floor). Granted: 16/6/2005

3.3 05/2584/C Modify condition 2 of 05/794/C to allow opening between 8am and 4am, each day. Granted 22/12/2005.

4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 Planning Policy Wales (2010) TAN 11: Noise TAN 12: Design

Circular 16/94: Planning Out Crime

4.2 Adopted City of Cardiff Local Plan (January 1996): 3 : Development in conservation areas 11: Design and aesthetic quality

4.3 Deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan (October 2003): 2.20: Good Design 2.53: Conservation Areas 2.64: Air, noise and light pollution

4.4 Supplementary Planning Guidance Cardiff City Centre Conservation Area Appraisals.

5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

5.1 Pollution Control No objections on noise grounds although a number of conditions are strongly recommended – no amplified music, no provisions to serve drinks on the terrace, no provision to serve food on the terrace, and customers should not be permitted to take drinks onto the roof area. No comments in respect of air nuisance and contaminated land.

In terms of powers under the Environmental Protection Act, the Officer has clarified that when disturbance amounts to statutory noise nuisance then enforcement can be undertaken. But the Officer notes that the legislation

131 only applies to statutory noise and not merely detriment to amenity, and any action relies on persons suffering first then making a complaint. It is an evidenced based process and the success of intervention will, to some extent, be determined by management practices.

5.2 Public Protection (Health Improvement Team) The area complies with smoking legislation as there is no roof structure.

5.3 Licensing The Licensing Officer notes that the premises currently benefits from a premises licence, and details of the licence are provided. As smoking is not a licensable activity and providing there is no intention to introduce a licensable activity on the roof top, no further comments are made.

5.4 Building Control The applicant will need to consider a number of issues as part of a building regulation submission. These issues include the extension of existing lift access, parapets and guarding to the perimeter fencing, assessment of existing stairwell, a fire evacuation strategy, additional lighting and signage, and confirmation that the existing roof structure can accept additional loading.

5.5 Legal Services Legal services have confirmed that the nightclub use is lawful by virtue of the Certificate of Lawful Use (05/1139/C). In terms of the planning application, Legal Services note that the applicant has applied for planning permission for “the erection of timber fencing to create smoking terrace on the roof". The LPA can determine that planning permission and are empowered by Section 72 “to impose conditions on the grant of planning permission .... for regulating the development or use of land under the control of the applicant (whether or not it is land in respect of which the application was made) or requiring the carrying out of works on any such land so far as appears to the local planning authority to be expedient for the purposes of or in connection with the development authorised by the permission”. If a grant of permission is considered, conditions can be imposed provided they relate to the use of the roof area for the purposes applied for.

6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

6.1 Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor Concern is expressed that the proposal could lead to anti-social behaviour and the possibility of missiles being thrown from the roofspace. The advantage of the proposal would be that the number of people smoking in the street would be reduced and the potential for conflict with smokers would be minimised. If permission is recommended, a number of conditions are sought to control the use of the roof area. The recommended conditions relate to a

132 temporary permission of one year only, the area to be used only for smoking and not for the consumption of food or alcohol, and the area to be supervised at all times. Also, consideration should be given to the installation of a net to prevent items being thrown, and a fire risk assessment should be upgraded.

6.2 Police Licensing Officer The Officer notes that the premises licence for the Glam nightclub relates to the sale of alcohol for consumption on the premises only. The rooftop does not form part of the licensable area and therefore patrons will not be able to take alcoholic drinks onto the proposed terrace. Any patrons on the roof would need to be supervised by a Security Industries Authorised member of staff.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 Neighbours have been notified and the application has been advertised on site and in the press.

7.2 Central Area Conservation Group: no adverse comments.

7.3 A letter of objection has been received from the Financial Controller of Park Plaza Hotel who notes that Greyfriars Road is a very busy part of Cardiff, a rooftop smoking terrace would add to noise levels that are already very loud, and the clientele will be throwing litter and cigarettes on people below.

7.4 Residents of number 31 Park View Apartments object on the grounds of noise nuisance, and note that the plans suggest that the terrace would be used as a barbeque and sitting area where people would consume alcohol, which would exacerbate noise levels.

7.5 A resident of number 13 Park View Apartments has written to state that he did not receive a notification letter. He strongly objects on behalf of a number of residents on the grounds of increased noise pollution – a subsequent e-mail from the owner of no. 13 Park View, dated 22/09/2010, contains objection e- mails from residents of apartment nos. 17, 4, and 29. Residents of numbers 33 and 34 Park View Apartments raise similar objections on noise grounds.

7.6 A letter of objection from the occupier of number 22 Park View Apartments has been submitted that also raises an objection on noise nuisance grounds. The letter notes that there is existing noise and disturbance from people standing in the street to smoke. Plans fail to indicate how people would be prevented from going to the front of the roof and leaning over Greyfriars Road itself. The proposed terrace would bring the noise problem closer to residents in Parkview. The resident considers that Churchill Road could become a bar/club area with Greyfriars Road retained for normal bars and restaurants.

133 8. ANALYSIS

8.1 The application relates to the erection of a timber fencing to create a smoking terrace on the existing Glam nightclub.

8.2 The timber fencing itself would be well set back from the front elevation of the building and therefore would not have a significant visual impact from the main Greyfriars Road elevation. The southern elevation faces a rear lane, Crockherbtown Lane, whilst the eastern and western elevations would adjoin existing commercial buildings. Given the proposed siting of the timber fencing and the amount of existing unsightly plant on the roof area, it is not considered that the proposed timber fencing would have an adverse visual impact. It is not considered therefore that the proposal would have an adverse impact on the Windsor Place Conservation Area, its character and appearance would be preserved - it is noted that the Central Area Conservation Group have no adverse comments.

8.3 The Public Protection Officer confirms that the proposal is acceptable in terms of environmental health legislation.

8.4 The application also relates to the creation of an outdoor smoking area for use in association with the Glam nightclub. It is noted that there are a number of existing food and drink and nightclub uses along Greyfriars Road and leading into Park Place. It is understood that there is a degree of late night noise already associated with these premises, and this is confirmed in representations received by neighbours in Park View apartments, and the Park Plaza hotel.

8.5 In terms of representations, the main concern of neighbours is that granting permission for a roof terrace smoking area would exacerbate the existing problems of noise nuisance, as the source of the noise nuisance would be brought nearer the apartments and hotel. Some concern is also expressed about the potential for anti-social behaviour, and that the application floorplans suggest that the terrace would be used as an area for the consumption and sale of food and drink.

8.6 In terms of noise nuisance, Pollution Control request a number of conditions, in order to control the nature of the use. South Wales Police note that the proposed smoking terrace could have some benefits in terms of reducing anti- social behaviour at street level – where smokers congregate at present – and do not object to the proposal, subject to a number of suggested conditions, which would aim to control the proposed use, including restricting any grant of permission to a temporary 12 month period only.

8.7 In terms of controlling the use of the proposed smoking terrace, the South Wales Police Licensing Officer has indicated that the premises licence for the

134 Glam nightclub relates to the sale of alcohol for consumption on the premises only. The rooftop does not form part of the licensable area and therefore patrons will not be able to take alcoholic drinks onto the proposed terrace. It would therefore appear that under the terms of the existing premises licence, the roof area cannot be used for any licensable activity. Licensable activities are defined in the premises licence as: the sale of alcohol for consumption on the premises during specified hours, the provision of regulated entertainment (indoors only), and the provision of late night refreshment (indoors only).

8.8 It is noted that neighbours are concerned about the potential intensification of use of the rooftop area, particularly if it became used for the sale or consumption of food and drink. Given that the submitted floorplans do show a seating area and a barbeque area, there is some uncertainty about the proposed use of the terrace. However in terms of the proposed use, the applicant has confirmed the following by e-mail :

1) The roof area would be used as a smoking terrace and would not be used for the sale of food or drink and would not have a barbeque area. The applicant would prefer that the consumption of drinks in plastic vessels be permitted but understands that this would require a variation to the premises licence. 2) There would be no provision of entertainment, including live or recorded music within the approved smoking area. 3) The terrace would be supervised at all times by a Security Industry Authority (SIA) licensed member of staff who will always be in radio communication with the other SIA licensed members of staff on duty. 4) The applicant would be willing to accept an initial temporary permission of 12 months in order that any potential impacts could be assessed.

8.9 Given the opinion provided by the Council’s Legal Services, and considering the concerns of the Pollution Control Officer, South Wales Police and neighbours, a number of conditions are recommended, which would have the effect of restricting the use of the terrace area to a smoking area only. Conditions are recommended in order to (i) prevent the sale or consumption of food or drink in the terrace area, (ii) prevent any provision of entertainment, and (iii) ensure that the approved smoking area is supervised at all times by a Security Industry Authority licensed member of staff. The controls that appear to be provided by the premises licence are noted but it is considered that the conditions suggested would provide certainty on the permitted use of the roof terrace area in planning terms. Also, in order to allow an assessment of any potential adverse amenity impact, a condition to restrict any permission to a temporary 12 month period only.

8.10 Neighbour objections are noted but considering the response from consultees, and given the context of the proposal in terms of the number of adjoining late-night food and drink/nightclub uses, it is not considered that a

135 refusal of planning permission on the grounds of noise nuisance could be supported. However, it is considered that the recommended conditions would provide sufficient control over the use to address any potential adverse amenity impact. The restriction of the permission to a 12 month temporary period will also provide the opportunity to assess any potential adverse amenity impact.

8.11 If the use of the roof area as a smoking terrace does subsequently result in excessive noise disturbance before the end of the temporary period suggested, the Council has powers to enforce under the Environmental Protection Act, if it amounts to statutory noise nuisance.

8.12 In terms of neighbour notification, letters were sent to the occupiers of all apartments in Park View on 18th August 2010, the application was also advertised on site and in the press. Therefore it is considered that the application has been properly advertised in accordance with the guidance contained in Circular 15/92 “Publicity for Planning Applications”.

8.13 Permission is recommended, subject to conditions.

136 137 New Shiplap timber frame 1010.00 E 1020.00 E with paint finish

Render finish Approximate External Building Line Building External Approximate

to new stairwell Approximate External Building Line

Half 2040.00 N Landing BBQ

LADDER TO ROOF

101m2 public area Stairs Disabled down to Refuge Second Floor

ROOF TERRACE Approximate External Building Line Building External Approximate

NEW FIRE EXIT TO 2030.00 N NCP CAR PARK K&W GLAM NIGHTCLUB OFFICES LOBBY

GLAM NIGHTCLUB OFFICE

Retain Car Park Ramp Ramp layout shown 2020.00 N indicative & subject to Render detailed survey ).#/ Finish

(#6%#6 (#6%#6 (#6%#6 (#6%#6 Line Building External Approximate STAIRCASE 3 Existing Club Entrance Proposed Front Elevation 2010.00 N NCP CAR PARK 1:100 @ A1 Line Building External Approximate Proposed Section LIFT Scale 1:100 @ A1

2000.00 N 1020.00 E 1010.00 E

PROPOSED ROOF TERRACE Scale 1:200

Render finish to new stairwell 138 New Shiplap timber frame with paint finish Approximate External Building Line

Half 2040.00 N Landing BBQ

Brick wall 1st Floor, Towers Point LADDER Towers Business Park, Rugeley TO ROOF Staffordshire WS15 1UZ Existing Tel: (+44) 01889 576358 Infilled window 101m2 public area Fax:(+44) 01889 580069 RTQLGEV openings Stairs Disabled down to Refuge Second Floor ENKGPV Peter Cro FTCYKPI VKVNG Proposed Roof Terrace Layouts

FTCYKPI PQ 7239-002A UECNG Proposed Back Elevation 1:100, 1:200 @A1 1:100 @ A1 FCVG JUNE 2010 FTCYP EJGEMGF Existing EHM DA #RRTQXGFD[ multistory

Car park Line Building External Approximate

2030.00 N 1:50 Plan of Roof Terrace @ A1 Roof Level

K&W GLAM NIGHTCLUB OFFICES LOBBY Second Floor

GLAM NIGHTCLUB OFFICE First Floor ).#/

(#6%#6 (#6%#6 (#6%#6 (#6%#6

STAIRCASE 3 FAT CATS BAR Existing Section Existing Front Elevation Scale 1:100 @ A1 Scale 1:100 @ A1 Existing Club Entrance Render FInish Car park 1010.00 E 1020.00 E

139 Approximate External Building Line Building External Approximate

Approximate External Building Line

2040.00 N

LADDER TO ROOF

Brick wall Line Building External Approximate 2030.00 N 1st Floor, Towers Point Towers Business Park, Rugeley Staffordshire Infilled window WS15 1UZ Tel: (+44) 01889 576358 openings Fax:(+44) 01889 580069 RTQLGEV

Car Park Ramp Ramp layout shown 2020.00 N indicative & subject to detailed survey ENKGPV Peter Cro FTCYKPI

Approximate External Building Line Building External Approximate VKVNG Existing Roof Terrace Layouts

FTCYKPI PQ 7239-001A UECNG 2010.00 N 1:100, 1:200 @A1

Existing Back Elevation Line Building External Approximate FCVG JUNE 2010 FTCYP EJGEMGF Scale 1:100 @ A1 LIFT EHM DA

#RRTQXGFD[ Car park Fire Exit

2000.00 N

EXISTING ROOF TERRACE SCALE 1:200 1010.00 E 1020.00 E COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/01398/DCI APPLICATION DATE: 30/07/2010

ED: SPLOTT

APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission

APPLICANT: Mr P Connors LOCATION: LAND ADJACENT TO 17 DEEMUIR ROAD, TREMORFA PROPOSAL: CONSTRUCTION OF TWO 1 BED SELF CONTAINED FLATS ______

RECOMMENDATION 1: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following condition(s):

1. Any topsoil [natural or manufactured], or subsoil, to be imported shall be assessed for chemical or other potential contaminants in accordance with a scheme of investigation to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in advance of its importation. Only material approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be imported. All measures specified in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with the relevant Code of Practice and Guidance Notes.

Subject to approval of the above, verification sampling of the material received at the development site is required to verify that the imported soil is free from contamination and shall be undertaken in accordance with a scheme agreed with in writing by the LPA.

Reason: To ensure that the safety of future occupiers is not prejudiced.

2. The development shall provide for two no. off street parking spaces in accordance with approved drawing reference 21417 / 01 prior to the beneficial occupation of the flats hereby approved. Reason: To make provision for the parking of vehicles clear of the highway in a timely manner.

3. The flats hereby approved shall not be occupied until such time as a hardstanding has been provided to the frontage of No. 17 Deemuir Road as indicated on approved plan reference 21417 / 01. Reason: To make provision for the parking of vehicles clear of the highway in a timely manner.

4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Permitted Development Order 1995 (or any Order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order) no gates shall be erected to the proposed

140 vehicular accesses without the prior written consent of the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that the use of the proposed development does not interfere with the safety and free flow of pedestrians passing along the footway.

5. The side access to the NE of the building shall be secured with a lockable gate prior to the occupation of the flats hereby approved. Reason: In the interests of site security and to mitigate against any unsociable use of the access lane.

6. The flats hereby approved shall not be occupied until there has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority a landscaping scheme including details of : (i) planting, shrubs and turfed areas ; (ii) hard surfaces; (iii) unbound surfaces (iv) means of enclosure; (v) any other amenity features and (vi) a timetable of implementation; and the landscaping scheme shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To maintain and improve the appearance of the area in the interests of visual amenity.

RECOMMENDATION 2: The contamination assessments and the affects of unstable land are considered on the basis of the best information available to the Planning Authority and are not necessarily exhaustive. The Authority takes due diligence when assessing these impacts, however you are minded that the responsibility for

(i) determining the extent and effects of such constraints;

(ii) ensuring that any imported materials (including, topsoils, subsoils, aggregrates and recycled or manufactured aggregrates/ soils) are chemically suitable for the proposed end use. Under no circumstances should controlled waste be imported. It is an offence under Section 33 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to deposit controlled waste on a site which does not benefit from an appropriate waste management license. The following must not be imported to a development site;

• Unprocessed / unsorted demolition wastes. • Any materials originating from a site confirmed as being contaminated or potentially contaminated by chemical or radioactive substances. • Japanese Knotweed stems, leaves and rhizome infested soils. In addition to section 33 above, it is also an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to spread this invasive weed; and

(iii) the safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer.

141

The Local Planning Authority has determined the application on the basis of the information available to it, but this does not mean that the land can be considered free from contamination.

RECOMMENDATION 3: Notwithstanding the submitted plans, it is suggested to the applicant that the separated and allocated amenity spaces to the rear of the development would provide for a more usable and functional amenity area if combined as a shared space; and the applicant is encouraged to provide a single amenity area in this manner, for use by occupants of both flats.

1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 This application is retrospective, and seeks consent for a nearly completed two storey development on an area of land adjacent to No. 17 Deemuir Road, Tremorfa for the purpose of two no. flat units.

1.2 The proposal is to construct a two storey extension to the NW elevation of No. 17 to elongate a pair of semidetached properties into a terrace, with the northerly property being constructed as two flats. The building is finished in materials to similar to No. 17, namely a red/brown concrete tile roof, pebble dash elevations and white uPVC fenestration and doors.

1.3 The new development would turn a bend in the road and would have its frontage and ridge in two planes. The ridge height would be very slightly lower than No.17, and would retain a hip, as does the exiting roof shared by the two semidetached properties.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 Deemuir Road connects Clydesmuir Road and Taymuir Road which are perpendicular carriageways. Deemuir Road also contains a near right angle bend. The street is residential and comprises a number of short terraces and the occasional pair of semidetached properties of which No 17 is one. 17 Deemuir Road is located on the inner (northern) side of the right angle bend. Some of the properties in Deemuir Road are flats/maisonettes. Land to the north of the application site comprises a secure garage parking area (4 units) with a gated access on Deemuir Road immediately to the N of the application site. Land beyond the garage complex, contained by properties in Taymuir and Clydesmuir

142 Road, has been developed as a square of inner aspect flatted courtyard properties.

2.2 Older properties in the area, including the application site are of traditional inter- war design, with approximately 5m eaves and 8m ridge heights. Most properties in the road have small front gardens and linear rear gardens. Unusually 17 Deemuir Road has previously benefited from a large side garden with detached garage, principally because of its position on the bend.

3. SITE HISTORY

3.1 05/2086/E Attached two storey single dwelling Granted Nov 2005

4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 Cardiff Unitary Development Plan Deposit Written Statement Oct 2003

Policy 2.20: Good Design Policy 2.24: Residential Amenity Policy 2.26: Provision for Open Space, Recreation and Leisure Policy 2.57: Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements Policy 2.74: Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development

Householder Design Guide - SPG

5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

5.1 Transport:

No objection is raised to the development proposed subject to the implementation of the off street parking arrangement indicated on the submitted plans prior to beneficial occupation; no gates being provided that would overhang or open over the adopted footway; and the provision of a lockable access gate to the to the access path to the NE of the building which would allow for secure storage of cycles within the rear amenity areas.

5.2 Pollution Control:

Request a condition relating to imported materials and a recommendation in respect of contaminated land assessment.

6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

6.1 None

143 7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 Neighbours and Local Members have been notified of the application.

7.2 The neighbour at 38 Deemuir Road telephoned to object to what he considered was

inadequate public consultation;

and

Scale (Suggesting that previous proposals were only single storey for an elderly and infirm relative of the owner of No.17 Deemuir Road.) Loss of Sunlight Flats being constructed in an area of family housing Concern over character of potential tenants Loss of on street parking and increased need for parking generated by two additional double bedded flat units ‘which might equate to four additional cars’.

8. ANALYSIS

8.1 Planning permission for a two storey dwelling of near identical footprint, height and elevation was granted in Nov 2005. The principal differences between that proposal and the development proposed in this application is that the development sought now comprises two flats; the insertion of an additional doorway into the front elevation to allow access to the upper floor flat; and the proposed subdivision of the rear garden to provide a separate amenity area for each flat.

8.2 Good Design The aesthetic proposed is considered appropriate and acceptable and the design is in keeping and sympathetic to existing traditional development in the road.

8.3 Residential Amenity The scale of development (as it was in respect of the consideration of application 05/2086/E) is considered appropriate to the plot size/height of the existing pair of semidetached houses and is not considered overbearing at any residential boundary or amenity area. The development presents no greater privacy implications in respect of the plane and position of habitable room windows to development to the rear than those provided by existing dwellings at 15 and 17 Deemuir Road. Windows to the front elevation would be in excess of 21m away from habitable room windows of properties on the opposite side of Deemuir Road and this is considered acceptable and in keeping with the existing relationships between existing property’s in the street. No fenestration is proposed in the side elevation of the building.

144

8.4 Provision for Open Space, Recreation and Leisure The submitted plans show the garden area of No 17 Deemuir Road being reduced to accommodate the new development. No. 17 would retain the garden area immediately in front of the property (approx 35-40 sq. m.) which would also accommodate one off street parking space. A further (approx) 40sq m of garden to the rear of the property would provide additional private amenity space for no. 17.

Submitted plans indicate that the new flats would share a front garden area of (approx) 60 sq. m. which would also accommodate two no. off-street parking spaces, and two separate areas of amenity space to the rear (accessed from a pathway at the side of the building) of approximately 25 sq m. each and divided by a communal bin compound.

It is the planning officers opinion however that the available amenity space for the two flats would be better shared, as an area of 50m2 would be infinitely more usable. An additional recommendation suggests this to the applicant. However, it is not considered that an objection to the proposed arrangement could be sustained as it is a better arrangement than that enjoyed by many flats within the City.

8.5 Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements The transportation officer’s comments are concurred with, the provision of 2 No. Car parking spaces for the two units proposed is acceptable. Public Transport in the area is adequate, and the rear amenity area could be secured to accommodate bicycle storage by condition.

Noting neighbour objection, the planning officer would not wish to support a greater number of off street parking spaces for reasons of encouraging the use of more sustainable transport modes, aesthetic impact, and because such provision would further reduce general on street parking by virtue of the size of necessary footway crossovers.

8.6 Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development The development provides for adequate refuse/recycling storage areas.

8.7 Neighbour objections

Neighbour objections are noted.

The Scale of development is considered acceptable.

There would be no loss of sunlight to the property at 38 Deemuir Road as the development is situated some 20-25m to the North. Shadow fall from the development would impact primarily on the rear garden area of 17 Deemuir Road

145 in the early morning and on the garage parking compound to the N / NE of the application site in the afternoon. This is not considered unduly different to the receipt of sunlight enjoyed by other properties in the immediate area.

The objection to the construction of flatted development as opposed to a family dwelling is not concurred with. The development will not reduce the amount of family housing in the area, and a mix of accommodation types provides for a more sustainable community. Concern over the nature of potential tenants could be extended to any form of accommodation and there is no evidence to suggest that these flats will be occupied by parties of undesirable character.

The plot originally contained a single garage with footway crossover from Deemuir Road. On road parking was available to the remainder of the perimeter of the site (approximately 3 car lengths). As proposed, the site, including the frontage of 17 Deemuir Road will now provide for 3 No. on site parking spaces and there would remain sufficient on road parking space to the perimeter for an additional car. This is considered acceptable.

9. CONCLUSION

9.1 Although retrospective, the development is considered on its merits as a proposal.

9.2 The development is considered satisfactory in all respects and a conditional planning permission is recommended.

146 147 148 MEMBER OBJECTION

COMMITTEE DATE: 13/10/2010

APPLICATION No. 10/01461/DCI APPLICATION DATE: 17/08/2010

ED: GABALFA

APP: TYPE: Full Planning Permission

APPLICANT: Cardiff Development Limited LOCATION: WAREHOUSE, ALLENSBANK CRESCENT, HEATH, CARDIFF, CF14 3PR PROPOSAL: CHANGE OF USE FROM PHARMACY WHOLESALE WAREHOUSE TO GYM CLUB ______

RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. The proposed development would unacceptably harm the living conditions of nearby residents, by reason of noise and disturbance resulting from activities both within the premises and from customers arriving and leaving the premises, contrary to policy 2.24 and 2.64 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan.

2. The proposed development would unacceptably harm the living conditions of nearby residents, by reason of a loss of privacy and perceived loss of privacy from overlooking into rear gardens and habitable rooms, contrary to policy 2.24 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan.

3. The proposed development would be likely to lead to fear of crime and anti-social behaviour, resulting from the customers arriving and leaving the premises, and gathering in the vicinity of the premises, particularly in hours of darkness outside of normal business hours, contrary to Welsh Office Circular 16/94 “Planning Out Crime” and para. 4.10.12 of Planning Policy Wales Edition 3 (July 2010).

1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.1 The proposal, as amended, seeks retrospective planning permission for a change of use from a pharmacy wholesale warehouse to a gym club to be used for ‘mixed martial arts’ (MMA). The gym’s web site indicates that the gym, run by Cardiff Combat MMA Wales, offers the following facilities: 20 ft training cage ‘Cardiff’s only one’, 14ft training boxing ring, full MMA ground work room and an olympic weight room. Sports offered include boxing, judo and cage fighting.

149 1.2 No external changes are proposed to the building’s external appearance, existing window openings or obscure glazing.

1.3 Amended plans were submitted to overcome drawing inaccuracies in relation to the windows, to reduce the number of off-site car parking spaces from 6 to 1, to include provision within the building for cycle parking and refuse storage, and to reduce the opening hours.

1.4 The agent has confirmed that: • The change of use will provide a gym club for mixed martial arts. • The lane is in the ownership of his client, and that the occupant of no 32A has the right of access over the driveway but not to stop or park on the land. • Opening hours have been amended from 9:30 to 20:30 Monday to Friday, 9:30 to 13:00 Saturday to the following: Monday 9.30 -17.00 Tuesday 9.30 -20.30 Wednesday 9.30 – 19.30 Thursday 9.30 – 20.30 Friday 9.30 – 15.00 Saturday 9.30 – 13.00 Sunday closed. • During the day, 4 – 5 persons arrive by car, the others arrive on foot or by bus/bike. The children’s classes take place on Tuesday and Thursday evening comprising 4 – 5 children, accompanied by an adult mainly arriving by car. The total number of vehicles at any one time does not exceed 6, including the manager. • There would have been a greater number of vehicle movements associated with the previous use of the building, which involved deliveries by large trucks and a number of vans each day collecting goods. • There are no plans to install air conditioning.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 The triangular shaped site comprises a former factory building, which was converted to a warehouse use in the 1960s, with associated access off Allensbank Crescent. The 2 storey, red brick building fills the entire site and is surrounded by residential properties on all 3 sides. The northern and south west elevation of the building forms the rear garden wall of properties along Talygarn St and Whitchurch Road, respectively. There are a number of windows at both ground and first floor, some of which have been obscurely glazed, boarded up internally or bricked up and some of which are openable. The eastern elevation of the building adjoins the full length of the dwelling at no 32A, and runs all the way down the side of the garden. There are 4 windows inserted into this wall at ground floor, and 1 window at first floor. The 4 ground floor windows in the garden wall of 32A relate to a ‘grappling room’, and are openable and boarded up internally to a height of 1.8m above internal floor level. The first floor window also relates to a ‘grappling room’, and has a cill height of 0.9m and is obscurely glazed to a height of 1.35m.

150 2.2 The access lane is 35m long, between 3.4 and 3.7m wide, and passes the front of 30-32A Allensbank Crescent, a row of 3 houses set back from the road, and the side of 34 Allensbank Crescent. 32A shares the access to the warehouse building, but is understood to have rights of access only. The only part of the building visible from a public viewpoint is the 3m wide elevation at the end of the access lane.

2.3 Allensbank Crescent is a short residential street of terraced housing with a scout hall on the southern side, which is used as a school and for various clubs and community activities. The street links Whitchurch Road and Allensbank Road, but is closed to vehicles at the Allensbank Road end. The land is level.

2.4 The proposal is located within a residential housing area, and adjacent to the Whitchurch Road District Centre boundary.

3. SITE HISTORY

3.1 The most relevant applications to this application is as follows: 24649 - Planning permission granted for use as a warehouse and showroom in 1964. The premises had previously been used as a wire brush factory with 32A Allensbank Road being the canteen and offices.

08/2386w - CONVERSION TO 6 WORK/HOME UNITS – refused for the following reasons: 1. The development would provide a poor standard of amenity for future occupiers of the work/home units by virtue of unacceptably small room sizes, poor outlook and a lack of outdoor amenity space, contrary to policies 2.21 and 2.24 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan, objective 2.2 of Supplementary Planning Guidance “Cardiff Residential Design Guide” (March 2008) and paragraph 9.1.1 of Ministerial Interim Planning Policy Statement 01/2006: Housing.

2. The proposed development would result in loss of privacy to the occupiers of adjoining residential properties in that they would be overlooked at close quarters, and would provide inadequate levels of privacy for occupiers of the proposed development, to the detriment of residential amenity and contrary to policy 2.24 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan and objective 2.3 of Supplementary Planning Guidance “Cardiff Residential Design Guide” (March 2008).

3. It has not been demonstrated that the development would provide secure, unobtrusive and easily accessible facilities for the storage of waste and of materials for recycling, to the detriment of proper waste management and contrary to policy 2.74 of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan.

151 4. POLICY FRAMEWORK

4.1 The site is located in a residential area, as identified on the Cardiff Local Plan Proposals Map.

4.2 The following policies of the Local Plan are considered particularly relevant: Policy 11 ‘Design and Aesthetic Quality’ Policy 17 ‘Parking and Servicing Facilities’ Policy 18 ‘Provision for Cyclists’ Policy 19 ‘Provision for Pedestrians’

4.3 The following policies of the deposit Cardiff Unitary Development Plan are considered particularly relevant: Policy 2.20: Good Design Policy 2.24: Residential Amenity Policy 2.57: Access, Circulation and Parking Requirements Policy 2.64: Air, Noise and Light Pollution Policy 2.74: Provision for Waste Management Facilities in Development

4.4 The following adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) is relevant: ‘Waste Collection and Storage Facilities’ (adopted March 2007), ‘Access, Circulation and Parking Standards’ (adopted January 2010).

4.5 The following legislation and national guidance is considered particularly relevant: PPW Edition 3 (July 2010): 4.10.12 Local authorities are under a legal obligation to consider the need to prevent and reduce crime and disorder in all decisions that they take. Crime prevention and fear of crime are social considerations to which regard must be given by local planning authorities in the preparation of development plans. They should be reflected in any supplementary planning guidance, and may be material considerations in the determination of planning applications. The aim should be to produce safe environments through good design.

9.3.3 Insensitive infilling, or the cumulative effects of development or redevelopment, including conversion and adaptation, should not be allowed to damage an area’s character or amenity. This includes any such impact on neighbouring dwellings, such as serious loss of privacy or overshadowing. 7.2.5 Many businesses can be located in and around small settlements, and in residential areas in larger settlements, without causing unacceptable disturbance. This can provide employment opportunities for those who cannot readily access major employment sites and can help to tackle social exclusion. In primarily residential areas, policies should not unreasonably seek to restrict commercial and industrial activities of an appropriate scale, particularly in existing buildings, provided that there are not likely to be adverse effects on residential amenity, landscape quality and the environment. 7.6.1 In determining planning applications for industrial and commercial uses, local planning authorities should have regard to:

152 • the impact of the development on the environment and local amenity (in terms of, for example, its scale and design, use of materials and natural resources, impact on landscape and wildlife, and its contribution to the generation of traffic and waste, noise and odour, emissions to air, water and soil, and its impacts on community safety and health); • ways to avoid, mitigate or compensate for negative environmental impacts, including the impacts of climate change; • accessibility by a range of different transport modes; • the possible need for, and scale of, transport and other infrastructure changes required to enable development to occur; • proximity to, and compatibility (in terms of nature and scale) with, residential areas; • compatibility with existing industrial and commercial activities; • whether the intensification of industrial / commercial use is appropriate; and • opportunities to encourage developments involving co-location deploying waste stream technology or practices, innovative business or technology clusters, sustainable energy and developments in the social economy. Planning Policy Wales Edition 3 - July 2010 - Chapter 7 Supporting the Economy 106 7.6.2 Where applications are considered for business development in primarily residential areas particular care should be taken to safeguard residential amenity, especially where there is potential for noise and/or traffic disturbance. Planning conditions may be used to control, for example, times of operation in order to protect amenity.

Circular 16/94 ‘Planning Out Crime’ 3. ‘Crime prevention is capable of being a material consideration when planning applications are considered.’ 1A ‘Fear of crime, whether warranted or not, is a significant problem in its own right, particularly among those in the more vulnerable sectors of society, such as the elderly, women and ethnic minorities.’

5. INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

5.1 Strategic Planning (Land use policy) advise that the proposal does not raise any strategic policy concerns, as the proposal will not result in any loss of residential housing.

5.2 Waste Management have no objection to the amended plans.

5.3 Pollution Control objects to the proposal, as amended, on noise pollution grounds due to the close proximity of residential accommodation. It is felt that noise generated from activities within the gym and from customers arriving/leaving the premises would have a detrimental effect on the amenities of nearby residents.

5.4 The Operational Manager Transportation provides the following advice:

153 I have noted the additional information provided by the applicant and have visited the site on a number of occasions, at various times of the day, in order to assess the concerns that have been raised by a number of objectors. It's clear that there is heavy demand for kerbside space on Allensbank Crescent and Orders are in place for Resident Permit Holders Only parking. An early morning visit (when the club and nearby shops weren't open and all parking may therefore be assumed to be associated with residents of Allensbank Crescent) showed all kerbside space, both restricted and freely available, to be fully occupied. However, a daytime visit showed a number the Residents Only spaces to be available though all the unrestricted kerbside space was in use. There was a similar picture at 6.30 on a Tuesday evening when the club was in use - though I would note that there was a seemingly well-attended event in progress at the Scout Hall, and that some kerbside space was available nearby on Whitchurch Road.

The applicant has advised that only some 4 or 5 persons per day arrive by car - and that these can be adequately accommodated on the lane access to the site. Whilst these are far from ideal in that the restricted width of the lane makes independent access and egress impossible, he advises that this arrangement does work in practice - and indeed on my evening visit I observed 3 vehicles parked end to end within the access. Therefore, mindful of the foregoing, together with the consideration that there would be an element of parking demand associated with the previous warehouse house (including the need for access and egress by large delivery vehicles), I am led to conclude that it would be difficult to demonstrate a sufficient element of 'demonstrable harm' to the extent that an objection on such grounds would be sustainable at appeal.

The ‘shared access’ scales at about 3.5 metres wide - so it's certainly debatable as to whether a pedestrian with a pushchair could pass a parked vehicle. It would depend on how carefully the vehicle was parked and also its size. It's most unlikely that a wheelchair user would be able to pass a parked vehicle. However, I'd suggest that this is a civil matter between the two parties and is an pre-existing situation as it's always been a shared access. I'd imagine that a delivery vehicle associated with the previous warehouse use would entirely block the access.

6. EXTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

6.1 Welsh Water has no objection.

6.2 Comments from the South Wales Police Crime Reduction Design Advisor will be reported to Planning Committee as a ‘late rep’.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 23 neighbouring properties were consulted. 12 letters of representation have been received from the owners/occupiers 7, 14, 22, 28, 30, 32, 32A, 36 Allensbank Crescent and 20, 22, 26 Talygarn St, and 1 of unknown address,

154 who raise objections to the proposal, as originally submitted, on the following grounds: (i) Exacerbation of existing parking and congestion problems, already high due to presence of Scout Hut and school, takeaway and local businesses. (ii) The access lane to the gym is full of parked cars. (iii) Use – unsuitability of the use of the building for a gym offering boxing and cage fighting, given its location in a residential area. (iv) Use - no objection to the use of the building as a gym, in principle, but concerns over impact of the proposal on the amenities of the area. (v) Need – there is no need for an additional gym facility - there is a gym at Maindy Pool nearby. (vi) Harm to residential amenity –as a result of proximity to residential dwellings, intensification of use and opening hours beyond normal business hours (reported to be 9 pm every night)– resulting in noise (from machinery, shouting, instructions being given, and music), disturbance and litter. Noise is audible by the occupier of 32A in the garden and within their home. (vii) Harm to residential amenity, as a result of access difficulties arising from the presence of parked cars along the full length of the lane. (viii) Harm to residential amenity, as a result of harm to privacy from people entering and leaving the site and the close proximity of the lane to dwellings and when windows – directly overlooking properties– are opened. (ix) Fear of personal health and safety, poor morale, and feelings of intimidation, resulting from strangers and parked cars and other hazards gathering along the unlit lane and nearby in such close proximity to residential dwellings. (x) The plans indicate a ground floor window on the northern elevation, which has been bricked up for 20yrs. Any proposal to open it or other bricked up windows on the first floor would harm the privacy of the adjoining residents. (xi) No proposals for air conditioning, which if installed may cause harm to the appearance of the building and result in noise disturbance. (xii) The business is expanding, with leaflet distribution and other advertising taking place in other suburbs of the city. (xiii) No information provided on the type of gym proposed, proposals to adequately ventilate the building or opening hours. (xiv) Impact on house prices.

7.2 Cllr Bridges objected to the proposal, as originally submitted, on the following grounds and requests that the application be reported to Planning Committee and deferred for a site visit: (i) Principle of development, taking into consideration refusal of 08/2386w and given that reasons for objection have not been addressed by the new application. (ii) Use – unsuitability of the location for a gym offering boxing and cage fighting, described as an ‘anything goes’ combat sport contested almost exclusively by young men and also advertising training in

155 boxing and ‘No Gi BJJ’ (understood to be a ‘submission grappling’ sport involving joint locks, chokes and strangles). (iii) Concern over the type of clientele attracted to the facility, with associated impact on local residents. Residents, many of which are elderly, report feeling intimidated by heavily-built young men gathering around the facility and along a poorly-lit driveway. (iv) Harm to residential amenity from noise from shouting, music and balls being bounced against walls and floors (particularly from the grappling room adjacent to a residential dwelling). When the site operated as a warehouse, noise was limited to between 9am and 5pm. (v) Harm to privacy, particularly of occupiers of 32A which site adjoins and overlooks the garden of. If no condition is imposed to require overlooking windows to remain obscurely glazed, the garden of 32A would be overlooked to an unacceptable level. (vi) Lack of parking – exacerbation of parking problems, with the previous use of the site as a warehouse attracting little parking other than occasional deliveries and few staff, and taking into consideration the existing use of the scout hut. (vii) Emergency access problems arising from the driveway being blocked by parked vehicles

7.3 Cllr Bridges objected to the proposal, as amended, on the following grounds: (i) Opening hours – the reduction in opening hours does not alter objection on noise and disturbance grounds, noting that different opening times will be difficult to monitor and enforce. (ii) Windows – the need for conditions to control windows remains. (iii) Parking – the reduction in off street parking from 6 to 1 will intensify parking problems.

8. ANALYSIS

8.1 The key issues for consideration are: (i) whether the proposal would harm the living conditions of nearby residents by reason of noise and disturbance

8.2 The development would unacceptably harm the living conditions of nearby residents, and particularly the owner/occupier at no 32A adjacent, by reason of noise and disturbance, taking into consideration the following factors: • noise generated from activites within the gym. • noise generated from customers arriving/leaving the premises, whether by car or on foot. • the proximity of residential uses to the application site, and particularly the proximity of the dwelling at no 32A, whose house and garden adjoins the site. • the design and arrangement of windows in the warehouse building walls, which form the shared boundary walls with the gardens of adjoining dwellings, with particular consideration given to the 4 no. windows that ‘overlook’ the garden of no 32A, some of which are openable. • the proposed opening hours, which extend beyond normal buisness hours on some days, compared to the during normal business hours that the

156 former warehouse business kept. As a result, any additional noise and disturbance would be perceived against lower background levels of noise, thereby, increasing its impact. • The intensity of use of the gym premises. • whilst the Scout Hut is open outside of normal business hours and would contribute to noise and disturbance, any noise and disturbance from the application site would be over and above those existing and would be likely to cause additional harm to adjoining residents.

(ii) whether the proposal would harm the amenity of nearby residents by reason of loss of privacy

8.3 The development would unacceptably harm the living conditions of nearby residents due to a loss of privacy, taking into consideration the following factors: • Existing ground and first floor window openings would immediately overlook the gardens of adjoining houses to the east and north of the premises, and would face towards habitable room windows of dwellings along Talygarn St at distances of approx 12.5m, resulting in unacceptable actual and perceived loss of privacy, as a result of overlooking. • Whilst it is noted that some of these windows have been bricked up for many years and that the occupier does not propose to make any changes to the windows or glazing contained within them, it is noted that some of the windows are simply boarded up internally and that planning permission would not be needed to remove this boarding, and that the first floor windows on the northern and eastern elevation allow some overlooking, as they are not obscurely glazed and non-opening below a height of 1.8m (conditions normally required to prevent overlooking). • Even where the windows are obscurely glazed, they would still result in an unacceptable perception of overlooking. • Whilst it is noted that some overlooking would have been possible from the previous warehouse use, it is understood that the hours of operation were more restricted and that the intensity of use was materially lower.

(iii) the effect of the proposal on public safety and security, and perceptions of safety and security

8.4 National planning guidance states that crime prevention and fear of crime, whether warranted or not, can be material planning considerations. Concerns have been expressed that the gym, offering boxing, cage fighting and other combat sports mostly attracts well built young men, and that some residents (particularly the elderly) feel intimidated as a result, whether warranted or not. There is concern that the proposed development would increase fear of antisocial behaviour in the area, causing additional and unacceptable harm to the living conditions of residents. Any customers lingering outside the premises would have an immediate impact, particularly on the dwellings closest to the access lane.

(iv) whether the proposal would make satisfactory provision for access, parking and circulation

157

8.5 Whilst there are some concerns about access and parking, as noted above, it is considered, on balance, that the concerns are not so significant as to warrant a refusal of the application for the reasons stated above.

8.6 In response to the objections and representations raised, I would comment as follows: (i) This issue is considered above. (ii) This issue is considered above. (iii) This issue is considered above. (iv) This issue is considered above. (v) The need for the facility is not a material policy consideration. (vi) This issue forms a reason for refusal. (vii) This issue is considered above. (viii) This issue forms a reason for refusal. (ix) This issue forms a reason for refusal. (x) This issue forms a reason for refusal. (xi) The agent has confirmed that there are no proposals for air conditioning. (xii) Noted. (xiii) Information is provided on opening hours and proposed activities. (xiv) This is not a material planning consideration.

8.7 The objections raised by Cllr Bridges all relate to the recommended reasons for refusal, with the exception of access and parking issues, which are addressed above.

8.8 In summary, whilst the reduced opening hours, employment opportunities, community benefits arising from the provision of sports activities and facilities particularly oriented towards young people, and other material considerations are noted, none of these issues outweigh the considerations that have led to the main conclusion that the proposal would be unacceptably harmful to the living conditions of nearby residents, by reason of noise and disturbance, loss of privacy and fear of antisocial behaviour, contrary to national guidance and development plan policy. The proposal is recommended for refusal.

158 159 160 161